Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

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

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    I still say that this the wrong approach and the wrong place to focus.  Look at some of the teams in the Top 10 for power play pecentage: Edmonton, San Jose, Toronto, NYI, Colorado I don't think I want to emulate those squads.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    These things aren't mutually exclusive.
    Why can't you have a good pp AND a playoff team?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : Bingo, I've said this also, put Seguin on the off wing like Stamkos and have him set up for the one timer. he will get some one timers off since they have to respect the fact that Chara is out there as well, plus if anything it will give Chara time to unload on one. The power play as it is set up now does not allow Chara time to get off a hard slapper. I've never seen a power play force the play to the point men so much even though they are covered. Could you imagine if Savard were still on this team? coming off the half boards he could shoot, feed seguin or drop one back to chara as he's heading to the net..that would be deadly.
    Posted by kelvana33



    That's exactly where I DON'T want Seguin.
    Why?
    Because he is much more dimensional than Stamkos, setting Seguin up for the one timer ignores his play making ability.  He's got great vision and that needs to be exploited more.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : Goal scoring forwards.  The B's didn't lose to the Caps because they couldn't score on the powerplay.  They lost becuase they couldn't score.  Rich Peverley isn't a first line winger in the NHL.  Jordan Caron isn't a first line winger in the NHL. The fact that they had so many 20 goal scorers and no 30 goal scorers tells me that they had a lot of guys who can score one out of every four games, but none who can score one out of every two.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    I say there will be a 30 goal scorer on the roster next season, his name is Tyler Seguin.

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

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    I still say that this the wrong approach and the wrong place to focus.  Look at some of the teams in the Top 10 for power play pecentage: Edmonton, San Jose, Toronto, NYI, Colorado I don't think I want to emulate those squads.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot

    Just want to emulate their success on the PP.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : Goal scoring forwards, of course, do not grow on trees and, therefore need to be signed or traded for. I am assuming you have no problem trading Krejci for a goalscorer. Anyone else? Who do you see available come July 1 that is worth chasing?
    Posted by jmwalters


    No, I have no issue at all with them trading Krejci for a goal scorer.  I honestly don't care if they trade Hamilton and Krejci for a goal scoring winger.  It's not going to happen, of course, but I'd be fine with it.

    There are a lot of guys worth chasing, but none of it is going to happen.  Management has already stated that they're not making any major moves.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : No, I have no issue at all with them trading Krejci for a goal scorer.  I honestly don't care if they trade Hamilton and Krejci for a goal scoring winger.  It's not going to happen, of course, but I'd be fine with it. There are a lot of guys worth chasing, but none of it is going to happen.  Management has already stated that they're not making any major moves.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    True but most GM's have been saying this as well so it may just be empty words. I am sure if the right deal presented itself to PC he would make a trade. Exactly what the right deal is, however, is open only to speculation at this point.

    One thing is for sure, I agree with you that the B's need a top-six goalscorer. Watching Lucic fan on every nice set-up he got from Seguin and Krejci in the playoffs was just painful to watch.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsfaninCanada. Show BruinsfaninCanada's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    Improve it.....wow what an idea!!!  Look, get that lump of a Lucic off the shaggin half boards on a PP and stick him in front of the net, no where else on a PP, use  the guys  with hands and speed  such as Seguin, Peverly there. Lets try to utalize Seguin's quck shot option there along with  a hard  shot from the point. That's two shaggin options, if they move out to the points  work down low and to the sides. Is  that too much for Ward/Julien to figure out???  I think wwe  should actually move  Lucic and try to get rid of Horton too, another practically useless body lumbering around the ice, one of them is enough (Lucic). Send em both out West somewhere. And the team should sit Marchant  down and tell him to bring it, speed, sauce, or sent  the lil ball of useless in the playoffs  to the minors. By all accounts  here in Canada (info in Nove Scotia, where he's from) he's not well liked and a jerk. Smarten up  Marchant......really  do you think your place on this team is that solid that you can coast in the playoffs????
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":

    I think wwe  should actually move  Lucic and try to get rid of Horton too, another practically useless body lumbering around the ice, one of them is enough (Lucic).
    Posted by BruinsfaninCanada


    Lucic and the concussed Horton "practically useless...lumbering around the ice, one of them is enough..."  Come on, man.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : I agree.  Of the 5 clubs you've mentioned only one, SJ made the playoffs.  We know the Bruins' PP was middle of the pack at 15th yet the 49-22-11-109 pt. Blues were ranked 19th in this regard.  Shows how misleading this stat can be.  Let's hope the change in PP direction Neely spoke of leads to measureable improvement.
    Posted by RichHillOntario



    Nope, terribly flawed logic.  Improving the pp, does not mean the B's will fall to the level of those 5 listed teams.  Making the assumption that a better pp, automatically turns the Bruins into another San Jose is ridiculous.
    The Bruins greatest strength is 5 on 5.  There is no improvement that could ever be made on the pp, that should affect 5 on 5, or the pk.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : Goal scoring forwards.  The B's didn't lose to the Caps because they couldn't score on the powerplay.  They lost becuase they couldn't score.  Rich Peverley isn't a first line winger in the NHL.  Jordan Caron isn't a first line winger in the NHL. The fact that they had so many 20 goal scorers and no 30 goal scorers tells me that they had a lot of guys who can score one out of every four games, but none who can score one out of every two.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    The math doesn't work in the above example.  One 80 goal scorer should get you almost goal a night.  Four 20 goal scorers should also get you almost 1 goal a night.  The B's did lose because they couldn't score.....but not, because they didn't have the "scorers" to score.   That had nothing to do with the end result.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : The math doesn't work in the above example.  One 80 goal scorer should get you almost goal a night.  Four 20 goal scorers should also get you almost 1 goal a night.  The B's did lose because they couldn't score.....but not, because they didn't have the "scorers" to score.   That had nothing to do with the end result.
    Posted by stevegm


    Over the course of a season, you never know when someone will score, or who else will score the same night.  That's why my statement focused on the individual, not the group.


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

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : Nope, terribly flawed logic.  Improving the pp, does not mean the B's will fall to the level of those 5 listed teams.  Making the assumption that a better pp, automatically turns the Bruins into another San Jose is ridiculous. The Bruins greatest strength is 5 on 5.  There is no improvement that could ever be made on the pp, that should affect 5 on 5, or the pk.
    Posted by stevegm


    You misunderstood what I said.  NAS stated factually that some of the top PPs in the league belong to some of the weaker clubs.  When he said he didn't want the B's to emulate those teams I figured he was referring to their present non-playoff situations. 

    I agreed and said of the ones he mentioned only SJ made the playoffs to illustrate how misleading PP rankings can be sometimes.  To further illustrate my point about misleading stats I offered the Blues as an example of a top club with a low-ranking PP.  Neither he nor I were suggesting the Bruins become another perennially underachieving team like the Sharks with an upgrade of their PP or drop in the standings.  That would be as you said ridiculous.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : Nope, terribly flawed logic.  Improving the pp, does not mean the B's will fall to the level of those 5 listed teams.  Making the assumption that a better pp, automatically turns the Bruins into another San Jose is ridiculous. The Bruins greatest strength is 5 on 5.  There is no improvement that could ever be made on the pp, that should affect 5 on 5, or the pk.
    Posted by stevegm


    You have a hard time with logical thinking, huh?

    No one is saying that improving the powerplay will sink the team.  The point many of us are making is that improving the powerplay doesn't mean the Cup is next.


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

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : Goal scoring forwards.  The B's didn't lose to the Caps because they couldn't score on the powerplay.  They lost becuase they couldn't score.  Rich Peverley isn't a first line winger in the NHL.  Jordan Caron isn't a first line winger in the NHL. The fact that they had so many 20 goal scorers and no 30 goal scorers tells me that they had a lot of guys who can score one out of every four games, but none who can score one out of every two.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    I'm going to say its a little of both.

    The fact they had many 20 goal scorers and no 30s tells me they are very likely to get shut down at playoff time, like they were.  I have trouble with this "second highest scoring team in the NHL" stuff when I remember piling on 8 and 9 goal games against Toronto and Calgary.  This doesnt help when you need a goal against a defensively strong playoff team.

    However, when you dont have very strong scorers, the PP does become more important, especially at playoff time.  Look at how deadly a mediocre team like last year's Canadiens became when they went on the PP.   I think the B's lost BOTH because they didnt score, and because their PP was horrifyingly useless when given an opportunity.  Did that PP even enter the zone cleanly and set up once on that end of Game 7 PP? There's your series. Sometimes it comes down to that.

    Another thing... the overall effect on this team as related to what they do about the PP has mostly to do with HOW they fix it.  If they come up with some sort of power play guru whose coaching suddenly makes Seguin/Chara/Krecji scary good on the power play... well, thats good but limited.  If the team goes out and buys/trades for a real deal scorer who not only solves the power play problem AND adds scoring that affects the entire lineup, thats far more significant.
     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    To me it's an easy fix. Too much reliance on the pointmen. Seems to me they revolve it around Chara and his shot. With that strategy you might as well have Greg Hawgood out there, because how many times is Chara able to wind up for the big shot? Not often, since the penalty kill is focused on him. Also, they seem to stay with strategy even if Ference is manning the point. Also, teams clog the middle, now you have Chara when he finally gets one off it's an 80 plus mph half slapper that most of the time doesnt even make it to the net.

    I agree with NAS, Krejci, when on the powerplay is very ordinary and he like the rest of them is too stationary. Get the puck down low and create plays down there, once you start scoring teams will adjust and then that will open up Chara. Your not going to have many powerplay goals when you keep forcing the puck in the oppsoite direction of the net.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    I still say that this the wrong approach and the wrong place to focus.  Look at some of the teams in the Top 10 for power play pecentage: Edmonton, San Jose, Toronto, NYI, Colorado I don't think I want to emulate those squads.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot



    pretty "logical"... what you're trying to sell here.  Emphasis on the pp will take away from someplace else.  To support that claim, you insert 5 examples of overall mediocrity.   Not wanting to "emulate those squads", has no context in this conversation unless you're implying that significantly more emphasis on the pp, could bring the B's down to their level.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : pretty "logical"... what you're trying to sell here.  Emphasis on the pp will take away from someplace else.  To support that claim, you insert 5 examples of overall mediocrity.   Not wanting to "emulate those squads", has no context in this conversation unless you're implying that significantly more emphasis on the pp, could bring the B's down to their level.
    Posted by stevegm


    See, that's the problem, stevegm.  Scoring on the powerplay won't hurt a team.  Goals are good.  That's sort of implied in a hockey conversation.  Sorry I wasn't clear enough for you.  I'll try again:

    While goals are good for a hockey team, because they can help win the game, scoring on the powerplay isn't necessarily the key to success.  As you can see, five of the top 10 best powerplay teams are not good teams at all, including the yearly basement dweller Edmonton.

    If the B's are going to look for success, I don't want them to try to copy success points of teams that aren't successful.  Stats show that power play prowess does not translate directly to marks in the win column.

    (There, stevegm.  Is that much clearer for you?  Sorry that I assumed that you were aware that goals were good for a hockey team.)
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : You have a hard time with logical thinking, huh? No one is saying that improving the powerplay will sink the team.  The point many of us are making is that improving the powerplay doesn't mean the Cup is next.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    Maybe while I practice improving on my "logical thinking", you can work on your memory, reading skills and attention span.
    This is a thread regarding Neelys remarks that the Bruins will be working on improving the pp.
    Your feelings on the topic are posted here, and go something like this.  "I still say this is the wrong approach, and the wrong place to focus".
    I've re-read every post on this thread, and not one poster has suggested "the cup is next" with an improved pp.   "The point many of us are making", is that an improved pp, is a good thing. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : See, that's the problem, stevegm.  Scoring on the powerplay won't hurt a team.  Goals are good.  That's sort of implied in a hockey conversation.  Sorry I wasn't clear enough for you.  I'll try again: While goals are good for a hockey team, because they can help win the game, scoring on the powerplay isn't necessarily the key to success.  As you can see, five of the top 10 best powerplay teams are not good teams at all, including the yearly basement dweller Edmonton. If the B's are going to look for success, I don't want them to try to copy success points of teams that aren't successful.  Stats show that power play prowess does not translate directly to marks in the win column. (There, stevegm.  Is that much clearer for you?  Sorry that I assumed that you were aware that goals were good for a hockey team.)
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    Goals are good

    Goals are good

    Goals are good

    I think I got it Cliffie.
    The pk, pp, 5 on 5, 4 on 4.....they're not like a trade nas.  You don't have to give away something on one, to "get" on the other.   Your hi-lited comments above reveal your impediment in comprehending something fairly basic.  Anyone equipped with the desire to learn, needs to understand the big pictire is comprised of many smaller ones.
    Because those 5 teams you mentioned don't achieve the overall success of the Bruins...that in no ways suggests there isn't much that can be learned from them, or anyone else for that matter.  Quite the contrary.  Despite winning the most recent Stanley Cup, nobody is clamouring for the B's pp executional philosophy.  The world is looking elsewhere.  
    I think most would agree, any team with a great pp, regardless of their overall success..., their pp, warrants a close look.  Same with a team with a great PK.  What they do during the time they're shorthanded, is on every teams radar.  
    Might not be a bad idea to reconsider that philosophy.
    There are also all kinds of stats on "power play prowess" too.  Here's one from not too far back.  Rarely does a team win a playoff round without scoring on the pp. This isn't a stat I guess, but some heretics have suggested that great teams with great power plays, have greater chances at glory than great teams with anemic power plays.  I agree with that. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    Maybe a team has a great powerplay because they spent a boatload of money on score first, score second, defense third players.

    That's not the B's.

    Follow along, now.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BSXIII. Show BSXIII's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    I don't think Neely or anyone else is expecting this team to have an elite power play.  Some teams are built for that and most would agree that this team certainly isn't one of them.

    However, the best 5 on 5 team in the league needs to at least be able to create scoring chances with a man advantage.  I think anyone watching the Bruins power play, whether a coach, media hack, casual observer, or hall of fame player would agree that they aren't making it very difficult  for the opposing PK often enough.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    I don't think Neely or anyone else is expecting this team to have an elite power play.  Some teams are built for that and most would agree that this team certainly isn't one of them. However, the best 5 on 5 team in the league needs to at least be able to create scoring chances with a man advantage.  I think anyone watching the Bruins power play, whether a coach, media hack, casual observer, or hall of fame player would agree that they aren't making it very difficult  for the opposing PK often enough.
    Posted by BSXIII

    The Preds had the league's best PP and on paper, they don't really look like they're built for the PP either. It's all about the coaching staff coming up with a system that works for the personnel they have available. If the Bruins want to open up the points then they'll need to work the puck below the goal line.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it.":
    In Response to Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it." : The Preds had the league's best PP and on paper, they don't really look like they're built for the PP either. It's all about the coaching staff coming up with a system that works for the personnel they have available. If the Bruins want to open up the points then they'll need to work the puck below the goal line.
    Posted by dezaruchi


    To be fair, it also helps to have both Weber and Suter on the point during a PP. The B's have a very good group of defencemen but are lacking in this kind of quality. We will find out next year when Weber and/or Suter move on if the Preds can maintain there excellent PP. If they do then, yes, their coaching staff should get the props they deserve.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davinator. Show Davinator's posts

    Re: Neely comments on the PP "We will improve on it."

    As NAS emphatically stated, scoring goals generally is a good thing and if the entire team could score more goals regularly, then a potent PP % is not likely as important.

    However, it is likely that the PP % would improve because the team can score regularly. That is pretty obvious.

    But there is a need to have a viable game plan with the extra man to take advantage of the open ice. Having the extra man/space should alone provide an edge and we haven't seen a real advantage to having a PP for a couple of years now.

    All I ask is that when we get a PP, we have a good chance we are going to score on it.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share