• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

GDT: Canes @ Islanders 4/27 2:00

Hopefully the boys will come home with gusto and wrap this mess up. Not their best, especially in the face off circle. Uggh.
 
I’d like to see the full team put in a full sixty minute effort and dominate like they can, they have not done that the entire series. Spurts of great play then some other things…
 
Not to rehash the downfall, but as I truly want to learn the nuances of the game. It seemed like we were resorting to many instances of dump and chase to get the pick into the o-zone, which tended to result in turnovers. One of the times Necas actually skated the puck in we scored. Of course, a couple
Of the other times he tried it he deked to many times and turned it over himself.
So is the dumping to the walls a symptom of a team not firing on all cylinders? Coaching? Something else?
Thanks for your input.
 
ksbeecane said:
Not to rehash the downfall, but as I truly want to learn the nuances of the game. It seemed like we were resorting to many instances of dump and chase to get the pick into the o-zone, which tended to result in turnovers. One of the times Necas actually skated the puck in we scored. Of course, a couple
Of the other times he tried it he deked to many times and turned it over himself.
So is the dumping to the walls a symptom of a team not firing on all cylinders? Coaching? Something else?
Thanks for your input.
Click to expand...
When the strategy doesn’t go as planned it’s pejoratively called dump and chase. If it results in goals it’s called forechecking. And it’s our bread and butter.
 
I wish our bread and butter was Aho on the forecheck. Knocks down Skinner, takes the puck and scores. That’s my favorite kind of bread and butter. I only had it once.
 
Even though we lost, I had fun @ game 4. UBS is a very nice arena. It's a long walk from the parking lots, but they have shuttles. They had a small fun fair/carnival thing going on outside which had a good band so that was nice. The arena itself is very nice - good food, wide concourses, good sight-lines. The only real complain is that the bathroom lines (for men, I'm sure the women's was far worse) would extend throughout an entire intermission; I can't believe a modern facility didn't have enough bathrooms. Or maybe a lot of people had to poop? :p

99.9% of fans were great, the .1% is the same .1% every fanbase has. I did think I was going to see a fight in my section but Islanders fans took issue with one of their own to settle him down, and I know my friend down in 120 was constantly being yelled at by some dude - but it sounds like he was just mad and venting.

Overall, I'd go back for a regular season tilt.
 
ksbeecane said:
Not to rehash the downfall, but as I truly want to learn the nuances of the game. It seemed like we were resorting to many instances of dump and chase to get the pick into the o-zone, which tended to result in turnovers. One of the times Necas actually skated the puck in we scored. Of course, a couple
Of the other times he tried it he deked to many times and turned it over himself.
So is the dumping to the walls a symptom of a team not firing on all cylinders? Coaching? Something else?
Thanks for your input.
Click to expand...
OK, look ... this is where the rubber meets the road for moving past being a casual fan, at least for me. The casual, occasional fan tends to see "dump and chase" as some sort of all purpose sign that a team is playing badly when that has ALWAYS been too simple. Yeah, bad teams tend to dump the puck in the offensive zone and then hope for the best. That part of the simple math is definitely true. But if they can actually get the puck back, then good teams do it too. Some more frequently than others, but the Canes have been at or near the top of the NHL in goals scored off of the forecheck (aka the chase part) quite often in recent years which is a pretty clear sign that dumping the puck in the offensive zone is a feature, not a bug ... for THIS team.

Other factors come into play as well. I cannot count how many times I've heard people in the stands bitch and moan about "lazy" play when a team chips the puck into the offensive zone to go off for a line change. That's frankly a childish understanding of the sport. Shifts for forwards are 60-90 seconds for the most part. This is not unique to any one team, or any one league. It literally is what it is, but that factors into the dump and chase evaluation as well. When a team is playing poorly they end up defending for the bulk of a forward line's shift and just when they get the puck they have to dump it and change lines. But good teams have shifts like that too, and fans have to learn the difference between a bad shift and a bad team or a bad gameplan.

We'd all love to see out teams play beautiful, flowing hockey with most of their offense generated off of well executed rushes. It's fun. I get it. But the other team is trying too and that tends to force even the best teams to have a Plan B. The best teams can score on you in a variety of ways. Mature fans know this and expect that variety.
 
jeffbear said:
OK, look ... this is where the rubber meets the road for moving past being a casual fan, at least for me. The casual, occasional fan tends to see "dump and chase" as some sort of all purpose sign that a team is playing badly when that has ALWAYS been too simple. Yeah, bad teams tend to dump the puck in the offensive zone and then hope for the best. That part of the simple math is definitely true. But if they can actually get the puck back, then good teams do it too. Some more frequently than others, but the Canes have been at or near the top of the NHL in goals scored off of the forecheck (aka the chase part) quite often in recent years which is a pretty clear sign that dumping the puck in the offensive zone is a feature, not a bug ... for THIS team.

Other factors come into play as well. I cannot count how many times I've heard people in the stands bitch and moan about "lazy" play when a team chips the puck into the offensive zone to go off for a line change. That's frankly a childish understanding of the sport. Shifts for forwards are 60-90 seconds for the most part. This is not unique to any one team, or any one league. It literally is what it is, but that factors into the dump and chase evaluation as well. When a team is playing poorly they end up defending for the bulk of a forward line's shift and just when they get the puck they have to dump it and change lines. But good teams have shifts like that too, and fans have to learn the difference between a bad shift and a bad team or a bad gameplan.

We'd all love to see out teams play beautiful, flowing hockey with most of their offense generated off of well executed rushes. It's fun. I get it. But the other team is trying too and that tends to force even the best teams to have a Plan B. The best teams can score on you in a variety of ways. Mature fans know this and expect that variety.
Click to expand...
Good summary.... With ya, other than this bit, which doesn't change your point but sure jolted my eyeballs. Other than Ovechkin (where he hangs out at his spot on the power-play for the full 120, occasionally coasting to near the red line if needed, so that probably pushes his average over 60), any forward pulling anywhere near that kind of shift length on the regular these days would get a coach, and teammates, in his ear pretty quick.... most are a touch over half of 60-90... more like 40-50 sec range.
 
dwind said:
Enlarge the ice surface, make it bigger than Olympic size rinks.
Click to expand...
We know where they can find one of those already, right?

Of course, back in reality, we know re-construction costs and lost ticket revenue in existing buildings means that'll never happen, even if the hockey brains decided it would be a good idea.
 
StormChaserBH said:
We know where they can find one of those already, right?

Of course, back in reality, we know re-construction costs and lost ticket revenue in existing buildings means that'll never happen, even if the hockey brains decided it would be a good idea.
Click to expand...
The lost ticket revenue is only theoretical, it would never happen in reality. The seats would just be re-priced to give the same box office revenue of the existing higher capacity.
 
andyt said:
The lost ticket revenue is only theoretical, it would never happen in reality. The seats would just be re-priced to give the same box office revenue of the existing higher capacity.
Click to expand...
yeah, but if that analysis was done, it means they could just reprice those seats anyway and take the extra money. reduced #butts in seats (and in concession lines, parking lots, etc...) has to cost them $ at some point.

And who's paying for the renovation costs of the buildings (seating, elevation, new ice floors with the expanded area) for a resulting game product that some say would be better, some say not? Nobody.
 
StormChaserBH said:
Good summary.... With ya, other than this bit, which doesn't change your point but sure jolted my eyeballs. Other than Ovechkin (where he hangs out at his spot on the power-play for the full 120, occasionally coasting to near the red line if needed, so that probably pushes his average over 60), any forward pulling anywhere near that kind of shift length on the regular these days would get a coach, and teammates, in his ear pretty quick.... most are a touch over half of 60-90... more like 40-50 sec range.
Click to expand...
Sorry, meant to put the word "max" in there. That was intended to be the outer limit.
 
The lost seating isn't the reason nobody in the NHL wants to talk about Olympic rinks. The real reason is all those concrete barrier walls that would have to be re-worked along with all the under-slab chiller piping that would have to be re-done. Combined with even a minor loss in ticket sales, it would take a good 5-4 years to recoup those costs. And WE'D be paying for it.

Cheaper solution ... get your refs to call the freaking game like they have functioning spines. Even in the playoffs.
 
The trend outside North America is actually toward NHL dimensions and away from Olympic dimensions. I can’t cite the reason for that. But as long as that continues and all other things being equal there’s no real pressure on the NHL to do anything about rink size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top