In what is sure to generate a lot of commentary from a lot of places this weekend, Canadiens management has signaled the end of the Jacques Martin era and have given the reins to Randy Cunneyworth for the interim. JM is a peculiar kind of coach, and his particular style of play (AKA "The System") has generated plenty of praise and ire from commenters here and around the web. I, for one, am not sorry to see him go.
I've never made it much of a secret that I'm no fan of JM and his System. I find it's boring and frustrating to watch, and more importantly, it's predictable to opponents and sometimes stifling for talent. I'm not saying that Gomez putting up garbage numbers is somehow Martin's fault, but I feel like Kostitsyn for one might have developed into an even better player had he seen more time on the ice the last two seasons. I also hate Martin talking about puck possession when he will let opponents have it enough to pepper his goalie with 50 shots while seeming to discourage physical play.
My take is that through most of his tenure, Martin has kept 2 scoring lines, a checking line, and another line consisting of people that had pissed him off lately. Obviously, AK46 spent a lot of time on that line. The emergence of a third scoring line this year has been a welcome surprise to us, but may have confused Martin—how is he supposed to punish players like Kostitsyn when he ends up skating with Eller and Desharnais to become one of the stronger threats we've iced this season?
Well, you could always break up the trio. Martin seems opposed to the whole idea of consistent lines and letting players develop chemistry. I'm not a big fan of this idea. I think players are better as they get to know each other and where each other like to be on the ice. I think physical play is an enormous part of hockey, and that the Canadiens are rightly criticized for being soft on their opponents at times. The System discourages things that aren't collapsing into your zone, like making your man pay the price for crossing your blue line or delivering the kinds of punishing hits Emelin is becoming known for. The lack of physicality allows opponents to take certain liberties, like running Price and and coming across our blue line with their heads down.
This is a better team than last season in my opinion. We have more offensive weight and are just as good in the back. Price is playing well and so are key players like Plekanec, Subban, Gorges, and Kostitsyn. We've had a number of players performing well-above my expectations, like Desharnais, Cole, Pacioretty, Weber, Diaz, and even Emelin. I have a hard time believing a coach can't do more with this squad compared to last season's.
We'd like to see more from Gomez, obviously, and Cammalleri and Gionta haven't been performing to their normal standards. Is this a coaching issue? I have no idea. We don't seem to be able to finish adequately around the net, either. We still seem tired and out of shape at times, and have trouble playing 60 full minutes. After several years of being one of the better power play teams in the league, we've suddenly forgotten how to use the extra man. Are these coaching issues? Obviously we can't tell at this point, but I'm inclined to say 'yes'.
With a new coach we'll find out the answer, and here we can let speculation run wild. Will Cunneyworth be left in charge for the long-term, or will Habs management be on the phone with Bob Hartley all year? Will the team get better without JM, or should we have held on to him for just a little while longer? Does Gauthier regret letting Guy Boucher go to Tampa, or is he still laughing over the Philly incident? How bad will the RDS rants be about Cunneyworth's poor French and his Toronto roots?
My take is that the team will improve, but more because things aren't about to get much worse. I've been seeing a team that does a lot of things right but just isn't getting the wins. I think they would have started coming in even if JM stayed on, but maybe they'll start coming a little quicker and more often under Cunneyworth. Let us know your take on the firing and what's next for the CH.
Showing posts with label system. Show all posts
Showing posts with label system. Show all posts
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Canadiens Shots Allowed
Flawed Implementation Or Implementing Flawed Approach
If you're like me, I think you thought that the addition of Jacques Martin to the fold would be a boon for the goalies, and perhaps ultimately the fans, as the haphazard defensive manner to which we were accustomed would be banished and replaced with simple play and reduced shots.
Now that we've given the system until the New Year (like we said we would), I think it's time to air a grievance: this isn't at all how I thought this would work.
Currently, the Canadiens sit in 11th position for GAA in the league. Not bad, but consider where they'd be without two 0.920 save percentage goalies, as they are also 28th in the NHL in shots allowed per contest. Their total currently stands at 32.8 SA/G (which may sound like a miraculously low total considering the recent onslaughts).
Certainly some of the onus for this high shot total must fall at the feet of the penalty takers (or victims of Chris Lee, if you prefer), since the Habs have given up the most PPs in the league (193). However, that might slightly gloss over the fact that their ES play is actually the bigger contributor to their SA totals. in fact, the Habs are one of the elite teams at preventing shots on the PK (analyse that...), but would allow a massive 31.5 shots per contest if they were penalty free.
Given that Jacques Martin is supposedly in charge of organizing and plotting team strategy for the 5-on-5, I was wondering what on earth was going on. If we don't have possession stats, we certainly have eyes – and those tell me that the Habs trend (espcially lately has been to sit and wait for shots and chances to come). Perhaps the comfort of two good goalies prevents fretting over the defensive pitfalls of this approach, but a look at ES scoring shows that a little more possession for the good guys might help to pad a few leads, win a few more close games.
Chances for and against
As I said, we don't have possession stats per se, but we do have some proxies. One of the better proxies at even strength is the CORSI numbers. However, as you know, though i like the number, I find it often oversimplifies matters. After all, there are several ways to get a good CORSI number: play bad defensively but take a lot of shots (misses and blocked shots count for you), play really well defensively and take shots, play unbelievable defence and take barely more than average shots. In light of that, I like to present the whole story (i.e., chances for and against), and relate those to what the league is doing. I present the status quo for the Habs below, with shots for (SF), chances for (ChF), shots against (SA), chances against (CA), and the differences between offense and defence:
Legend
As you can see, chances for with the Habs is a mixed bag. Gionta, Gomez, Pouliot and Markov generate top tier chances, while the offensive laggards (Laraque and co.), well, lag. I'm sure there's lots to be mined from the numbers and the relationships between them, but not today.
Chances against are more homgenous. They are all blue. It is systematic. This, for me, is most interesting. Once again, the bad players are bad. However, even the players we heap praise on for defensive awareness are allowing above average number of shots to be released from opponents' sticks.
Leaving the offensive stats behind, I delved deeper into the defensive numbers to try and figure out what is happening. I present the numbers for you to consider below for shots against (SA), missed shots against (MA), blocked shots (BF), chances against (ChA) and percentage of shots against making the net (SA%):
Legend
This table is most interesting for those who want to get to the bottom of the Jacques martin system, I think. Column by column, it's pretty consistently league average or below, or league average and above.
The breakdown of chances across the whole team seems to be summed up by lots of shots attempted against, an enormous amount blocked, many opponents forced to shoot wide, but still more than average shots getting to the net.
Shots against (as we noted earlier) is troubling, even if it doesn't result in goals 92% of the time. Most Habs are belowe the league average in preventing shots on their goal.
Blocked shots is an interesting category. It must be the only statistic in the league where the Canadiens could look like such a star outfit. No less than 12 Habs fall into the top 10% of the league in blocked shots at ES while they're on the ice. The rest are above average (only Pouliot, with his Wild numbers incorporated, spoils the whitewash). Missed shots is similar, if not quite as dominant, almost all Habs being above the league average.
Add up below average shot prevention, more than average missed shots and more than average blocked shots and you get the blue mess that follows in chances against. The numbers in that column are sub-optimal by most standards and some are downright abysmal (see >60 ChA/60).
It seems to me (and maybe to you as well, dear readers) that this is a bit of a red flag for the passive approach to defence that is currently being employed by Martin and his boys. While the defensive clogging of the slot is surely leading to some impressive blocked and missed shot totals, it seem to me that the Canadiens aren't perhaps negotiating the next part of the strategy very well at all – which should be making the shot a turnover by recovering the puck.
System performers
So, we've got to the bottom of the system (at least the one used so far). Allow the shot from the outside – block it or force the player to shoot wide – then recover the puck and start an attack. As a system it's not stupid, the team that seems to use it best this season is Pittsburgh who translate above average chances against into below average shots against. However, it must also be said that most teams we think of as defensive outfits don't trust this way of defending. New Jersey, Boston, Detroit, these teams all reduce chances overall and limit the number of shots that have to be blocked or forced wide.
In addition to the Penguins, there are players on the Habs who seem to get this system and can play it with some success. To me, these are the players that have warmer shades in the SA column and top rankings in the missed and blocked columns. The standouts seem to be Glen Metropoilt, Josh Gorges and Roman Hamrlik. All three players (and observation I think would back this up) play their position well and are good at jumping to retrieve the loose stuff after the initial chance.
System failures
Troublingly, the successes are outnumbered by the strugglers. Ignore Markov for now (he's had offense on the mind in his return), but do cast an eye to O'Byrne, Lapierre and Mara. These three players all allow 59 chances an hour or more. They are all on the ice for plenty of blocked shots and missed shots, but the sheer number of reloads they are allowing means they are also on the ice for a shot every 2 minutes or less.
Add to these players, Spacek, Gill, Gomez, Sergei Kostitsyn and even Gionta and we're in trouble.
When to change?
45 games into a season and many players appear on paper (and on TV) to be having significant trouble with a system that demands passivity, patience and then quickness to make it work properly. It begs the question, should Martin persist with this system.
If not, how late is too late to change? After all, it seems to be unravelling more than it is coming together at this point in the season. What's more, i think we've al seen enough proof that it doesn't work as well against good teams as it seems to against the Islanders.
If I were the coach, I'd be having a little think about all this.
I'd like to know what all of you think...
Now that we've given the system until the New Year (like we said we would), I think it's time to air a grievance: this isn't at all how I thought this would work.
Currently, the Canadiens sit in 11th position for GAA in the league. Not bad, but consider where they'd be without two 0.920 save percentage goalies, as they are also 28th in the NHL in shots allowed per contest. Their total currently stands at 32.8 SA/G (which may sound like a miraculously low total considering the recent onslaughts).
Certainly some of the onus for this high shot total must fall at the feet of the penalty takers (or victims of Chris Lee, if you prefer), since the Habs have given up the most PPs in the league (193). However, that might slightly gloss over the fact that their ES play is actually the bigger contributor to their SA totals. in fact, the Habs are one of the elite teams at preventing shots on the PK (analyse that...), but would allow a massive 31.5 shots per contest if they were penalty free.
Given that Jacques Martin is supposedly in charge of organizing and plotting team strategy for the 5-on-5, I was wondering what on earth was going on. If we don't have possession stats, we certainly have eyes – and those tell me that the Habs trend (espcially lately has been to sit and wait for shots and chances to come). Perhaps the comfort of two good goalies prevents fretting over the defensive pitfalls of this approach, but a look at ES scoring shows that a little more possession for the good guys might help to pad a few leads, win a few more close games.
Chances for and against
As I said, we don't have possession stats per se, but we do have some proxies. One of the better proxies at even strength is the CORSI numbers. However, as you know, though i like the number, I find it often oversimplifies matters. After all, there are several ways to get a good CORSI number: play bad defensively but take a lot of shots (misses and blocked shots count for you), play really well defensively and take shots, play unbelievable defence and take barely more than average shots. In light of that, I like to present the whole story (i.e., chances for and against), and relate those to what the league is doing. I present the status quo for the Habs below, with shots for (SF), chances for (ChF), shots against (SA), chances against (CA), and the differences between offense and defence:
| NAME | GP | SFON/60 | ChF/60 | SAON/60 | ChA/60 | Sh Diff | Ch Diff |
| Andrei Kostitsyn | 40 | 24.3 | 49.8 | 27 | 53.8 | -2.7 | -4 |
| Andrei Markov | 9 | 30.4 | 56.2 | 42.5 | 70.6 | -12.1 | -14.4 |
| Benoit Pouliot | 19 | 32.3 | 57.1 | 28.3 | 55.7 | 4 | 1.4 |
| Brian Gionta | 23 | 29.9 | 61.9 | 30.2 | 57.6 | -0.3 | 4.3 |
| Geln Metropolit | 38 | 24.8 | 50 | 26.5 | 58.6 | -1.7 | -8.6 |
| Georges Laraque | 23 | 15 | 32.3 | 28.6 | 68.5 | -13.6 | -36.2 |
| Hal Gill | 30 | 20.9 | 45.6 | 28.5 | 57.1 | -7.6 | -11.5 |
| Jaroslav Spacek | 42 | 26.3 | 54.1 | 29.5 | 59.5 | -3.2 | -5.4 |
| Josh Gorges | 44 | 21.8 | 44.6 | 26.7 | 56.6 | -4.9 | -12 |
| Marc-Andre Bergeron | 37 | 24.5 | 53 | 27.8 | 56.2 | -3.3 | -3.2 |
| Matt D'Agostini | 29 | 20.4 | 48.1 | 27.9 | 55.4 | -7.5 | -7.3 |
| Max Pacioretty | 43 | 25.7 | 52.7 | 28.3 | 56.1 | -2.6 | -3.4 |
| Maxim Lapierre | 44 | 18.4 | 44.5 | 30.5 | 61.5 | -12.1 | -17 |
| Michael Cammalleri | 44 | 25 | 54.2 | 28.9 | 57.8 | -3.9 | -3.6 |
| Paul Mara | 34 | 22.3 | 49 | 30.7 | 59.4 | -8.4 | -10.4 |
| Roman Hamrlik | 37 | 25.1 | 52.4 | 26.4 | 55.8 | -1.3 | -3.4 |
| Ryan O'Byrne | 24 | 20 | 43.7 | 31.3 | 59.4 | -11.3 | -15.7 |
| Ryan White | 13 | 14.4 | 37.1 | 31.1 | 62.6 | -16.7 | -25.5 |
| Scott Gomez | 40 | 28.5 | 56.7 | 30.1 | 56.3 | -1.6 | 0.4 |
| Sergei Kostitsyn | 19 | 21.8 | 44.2 | 31.2 | 59 | -9.4 | -14.8 |
| Tom Pyatt | 19 | 19.2 | 40 | 31 | 63 | -11.8 | -23 |
| Tomas Plekanec | 44 | 23.1 | 47.6 | 28.6 | 58.2 | -5.5 | -10.6 |
| Travis Moen | 44 | 24 | 46.5 | 28.8 | 57 | -4.8 | -10.5 |
Legend
| Top 10% NHL | 11-20% NHL | 21-40% NHL | Average NHL | 61-80% NHL | 81-90% NHL | Bottom 10% NHL |
As you can see, chances for with the Habs is a mixed bag. Gionta, Gomez, Pouliot and Markov generate top tier chances, while the offensive laggards (Laraque and co.), well, lag. I'm sure there's lots to be mined from the numbers and the relationships between them, but not today.
Chances against are more homgenous. They are all blue. It is systematic. This, for me, is most interesting. Once again, the bad players are bad. However, even the players we heap praise on for defensive awareness are allowing above average number of shots to be released from opponents' sticks.
Leaving the offensive stats behind, I delved deeper into the defensive numbers to try and figure out what is happening. I present the numbers for you to consider below for shots against (SA), missed shots against (MA), blocked shots (BF), chances against (ChA) and percentage of shots against making the net (SA%):
| NAME | GP | SAON/60 | MAON/60 | BFON/60 | ChA/60 | SA% |
| Andrei Kostitsyn | 40 | 27 | 11.4 | 15.4 | 53.8 | 50.2% |
| Andrei Markov | 9 | 42.5 | 13.7 | 14.4 | 70.6 | 60.2% |
| Benoit Pouliot | 19 | 28.3 | 13.7 | 13.7 | 55.7 | 50.8% |
| Brian Gionta | 23 | 30.2 | 13.2 | 14.2 | 57.6 | 52.4% |
| Geln Metropolit | 38 | 26.5 | 13.9 | 18.2 | 58.6 | 45.2% |
| Georges Laraque | 23 | 28.6 | 18.6 | 21.3 | 68.5 | 41.8% |
| Hal Gill | 30 | 28.5 | 13.4 | 15.2 | 57.1 | 49.9% |
| Jaroslav Spacek | 42 | 29.5 | 12.2 | 17.8 | 59.5 | 49.6% |
| Josh Gorges | 44 | 26.7 | 12.9 | 17 | 56.6 | 47.2% |
| Marc-Andre Bergeron | 37 | 27.8 | 11.7 | 16.7 | 56.2 | 49.5% |
| Matt D'Agostini | 29 | 27.9 | 9 | 18.5 | 55.4 | 50.4% |
| Max Pacioretty | 43 | 28.3 | 10.7 | 17.1 | 56.1 | 50.4% |
| Maxim Lapierre | 44 | 30.5 | 12.4 | 18.6 | 61.5 | 49.6% |
| Michael Cammalleri | 44 | 28.9 | 12.6 | 16.3 | 57.8 | 50.0% |
| Paul Mara | 34 | 30.7 | 12.3 | 16.4 | 59.4 | 51.7% |
| Roman Hamrlik | 37 | 26.4 | 12.2 | 17.2 | 55.8 | 47.3% |
| Ryan O'Byrne | 24 | 31.3 | 10.6 | 17.5 | 59.4 | 52.7% |
| Ryan White | 13 | 31.1 | 12.7 | 18.8 | 62.6 | 49.7% |
| Scott Gomez | 40 | 30.1 | 12.1 | 14.1 | 56.3 | 53.5% |
| Sergei Kostitsyn | 19 | 31.2 | 11 | 16.8 | 59 | 52.9% |
| Tom Pyatt | 19 | 31 | 13.1 | 18.9 | 63 | 49.2% |
| Tomas Plekanec | 44 | 28.6 | 12.4 | 17.2 | 58.2 | 49.1% |
| Travis Moen | 44 | 28.8 | 11.9 | 16.3 | 57 | 50.5% |
Legend
| Top 10% NHL | 11-20% NHL | 21-40% NHL | Average NHL | 61-80% NHL | 81-90% NHL | Bottom 10% NHL |
This table is most interesting for those who want to get to the bottom of the Jacques martin system, I think. Column by column, it's pretty consistently league average or below, or league average and above.
The breakdown of chances across the whole team seems to be summed up by lots of shots attempted against, an enormous amount blocked, many opponents forced to shoot wide, but still more than average shots getting to the net.
Shots against (as we noted earlier) is troubling, even if it doesn't result in goals 92% of the time. Most Habs are belowe the league average in preventing shots on their goal.
Blocked shots is an interesting category. It must be the only statistic in the league where the Canadiens could look like such a star outfit. No less than 12 Habs fall into the top 10% of the league in blocked shots at ES while they're on the ice. The rest are above average (only Pouliot, with his Wild numbers incorporated, spoils the whitewash). Missed shots is similar, if not quite as dominant, almost all Habs being above the league average.
Add up below average shot prevention, more than average missed shots and more than average blocked shots and you get the blue mess that follows in chances against. The numbers in that column are sub-optimal by most standards and some are downright abysmal (see >60 ChA/60).
It seems to me (and maybe to you as well, dear readers) that this is a bit of a red flag for the passive approach to defence that is currently being employed by Martin and his boys. While the defensive clogging of the slot is surely leading to some impressive blocked and missed shot totals, it seem to me that the Canadiens aren't perhaps negotiating the next part of the strategy very well at all – which should be making the shot a turnover by recovering the puck.
System performers
So, we've got to the bottom of the system (at least the one used so far). Allow the shot from the outside – block it or force the player to shoot wide – then recover the puck and start an attack. As a system it's not stupid, the team that seems to use it best this season is Pittsburgh who translate above average chances against into below average shots against. However, it must also be said that most teams we think of as defensive outfits don't trust this way of defending. New Jersey, Boston, Detroit, these teams all reduce chances overall and limit the number of shots that have to be blocked or forced wide.
In addition to the Penguins, there are players on the Habs who seem to get this system and can play it with some success. To me, these are the players that have warmer shades in the SA column and top rankings in the missed and blocked columns. The standouts seem to be Glen Metropoilt, Josh Gorges and Roman Hamrlik. All three players (and observation I think would back this up) play their position well and are good at jumping to retrieve the loose stuff after the initial chance.
System failures
Troublingly, the successes are outnumbered by the strugglers. Ignore Markov for now (he's had offense on the mind in his return), but do cast an eye to O'Byrne, Lapierre and Mara. These three players all allow 59 chances an hour or more. They are all on the ice for plenty of blocked shots and missed shots, but the sheer number of reloads they are allowing means they are also on the ice for a shot every 2 minutes or less.
Add to these players, Spacek, Gill, Gomez, Sergei Kostitsyn and even Gionta and we're in trouble.
When to change?
45 games into a season and many players appear on paper (and on TV) to be having significant trouble with a system that demands passivity, patience and then quickness to make it work properly. It begs the question, should Martin persist with this system.
If not, how late is too late to change? After all, it seems to be unravelling more than it is coming together at this point in the season. What's more, i think we've al seen enough proof that it doesn't work as well against good teams as it seems to against the Islanders.
If I were the coach, I'd be having a little think about all this.
I'd like to know what all of you think...
Monday, October 27, 2008
Panic Stations?
Things On the Habs Worth Fretting Over
Panic Stations?
Things On the Habs Worth Fretting Over
Oh, you could see we were all dying for a loss. So many topics we had been raring to blog about, so many things more than lamenting Kovalev's line only scoring 0.6 PPG. A loss is a good tonic. It brings it all out.
But as with all things, the Canadiens are never quite as bad as they appeared in a loss – never quite as good as we rave they are after a win. So, although the defence was bad in Saturday night's game, the fact is that they often play just as poorly and get away with (both on the scoresheet and the broadsheet). And, another fact is that Anaheim's defence (one we would all be envious to have on paper) was pretty piss poor as well.
For me, the underlying lesson from all this is that defence in this league is difficult. Very difficult. Talking about keeping a child fist-sized piece of rubber out of a sumo wrestler-sized net is hard – more so when people actually shoot straight. Blocking 90 mph shots and rooting the puck out of the corner when 230 lb behemoths are barreling down on you is no walk in the park either.
On most occasions, the team gets away with it, usually through a combination of luck, timing and goalkeeper skill. Occasionally, two or more of these things go the wrong way and it all goes pear-shaped.
Saturday night, all three things went in the wrong direction as far as I could see. The Canadiens hit posts and legs, the Ducks (by and large) did not, the Ducks anticipated their breaks well with many players jumping in and Halak and Price were unusually useless allies.
I do believe a lot of the fault lies at the feet of the defencemen for this one. In trying to be philosophical about the loss, I mostly give them the benefit of several players all having bad nights at once.
JT at The H Does Not Stand For Habs does a fine job at calling the issues with players. For my part, I wanted to supplement her views with some views on a couple of issues that go deeper than bad luck and miscues. In my mind these are:
1) The defensive system
2) The Brisebois situation
The system of defence
From the beginning of the season, one thing was very clear to me – we would need a good goalie this year. The Canadiens coaches seem to have gone with old faithful in terms of Habs strategies – hedge your bets on goaltending. From the my first memories of hockey until now, this has been the strategy employed by management.
One can hardly argue with the idea: get a good goalie and let him stop the shots. It is both cost effective and more reliable than trying to get the job done with 6 different guys paid at variable rates. And, in Halak and Price, the Canadiens have two reliable and efficient netminders.
The problem is not with the overall premise for me, but rather with the lack of much planning beyond the initial choice of “goalie or bust”.
Signing Hamrlik was a nice move to try and instill a second tier to the plan. But it kind of stopped short there. With Roman and Markov it means that for large parts of the game we can have 5 dependable players on the ice. The problem (as we saw Saturday) was that when one of them (the lynch-pin piece, no less) goes AWOL, then 4 dependable pieces just isn’t enough.
The system is naïve, as well. Over-reliance on a goaltender hasn’t been in style since Hasek left the Sabres. Even NJ, with the best insurance policy of all, have a system to fall back on.
If the Canadiens are to achieve any kind of meaningful success this year, it will happen through improvement to this, their greatest deficiency. Someone will have to help Komisarek take the next step in development (i.e., playing the puck to the forwards) and oversee the progress of Gorges and O’Byrne.
The question of who this person will be has been raised (again by JT):
It’s been an issue on my mind for some time. Personally, I’m not sure if a change in personnel is necessary – possibly just a renewed focus. Teach the defencemen to be consistent, how to trust themselves in possession, how to make time and room for themselves by anticipating the play, and teach them some safe rescue manoeuvres that don’t include dumping it up the middle. The system Detroit teaches is simple: it is patience over panic.
This is salvageable. Even with the current group. They are intelligent enough, can skate and have shown they can improve. Hopefully this game will highlight that this needs to be the focus of a season’s work – readying their system for April.
Brisebois
This, unlike the former is no minor indictment. It is major in my mind. This situation keeps on rearing its head and little is done to remedy it. The fact that it took until the Anaheim game to become apparent that Brisebois is still Brisebois is surprising. The fact that he had a game like he did is not.
Now, I can rant with the best of them on how much I dislike the moments where I have to sit through 60 seconds of a Brisebois shift, but this time, that’s kind of beside the point. He is what he is. He’s trying as hard as he ever did, and his skills are diminished now (if that’s even imaginable).
This whole situation is the responsibility of the management who continues to sign this player and the coaching staff that continues to play him. The fixation on Patrice, whatever it is, is and will continue to be the Achilles’ heel of this team.
As one fan in a throng who sees things on this dossier in the same light, I am puzzled. Of course I defer to the judgment of these men on hockey specifics. But in my mind, this is not a matter of expertise, this is basic: Patrice has glaring deficiencies, he is a free agent – don’t sign him…
(The fact that Anaheim, only two days earlier, had signed Bret Hedican (+17 on a team that scored 4 more goals than they allowed) was a reminder that our signing strategy on defence was haphazard to say the least. Far from being an advocate of signing another washed-up defenceman – Hedican while not a real option perhaps just highlights how silly our own signing, so early in the summer was.)
I much prefer the idea of promoting from within because it allows for two important benefits: cheap salary and open mind. In the case of the Canadiens, they actually did have the chance to promote from within. An opportunity missed as it turns out. Shawn Belle is a former Team Canada member, has NHL experience and is good enough to be a 7th defenceman. Opinions may vary, but both Valentenko and Weber could have handled the odd assignment in the NHL too, as far as I’m concerned.
If I accept that Brisebois should have been signed (and I don’t), I still object to him starting every game, playing every game and playing in every situation. I thought he was insurance. I thought he was a fall-back position – at worst.
The problem is, while management talk about Patrice in those terms many times, they use him very differently when it comes to action time. We are not privy to the private conversations between Gainey, Gauthier, Carbonneau, Jarvis and Muller. We can only guess. But it is certain now that one of this braintrust is a Brisebois-believer, and at the very least the other 4 are not adamantly against him. I have a feeling this decision falls to the coaches, and I have an inkling which of the three it might be. In any case, that is irrelevant.
And, to be honest, Saturday represents the least of my concerns here. Although young Ryan O’Byrne, a defenceman with half a year of NHL experience, was probably wrongly benched for poor play vs. Florida, it is the memory of the playoffs that makes me uneasy here.
Last season, after the most successful run the club had had in more than a decade, the coaches decided on the eve of the playoffs to shuffle the deck. In come veterans (because that’s a winning formula in the playoffs). Even when the experiment went awry with 3 losses against a team we had (and should have continued to) dominated all season, the coaches stuck with Brisebois. The lineup was contorted to fit him in. A goalscorer was benched when we needed goals, two defenceman moved up front when we needed goals and Brisebois played and played when we couldn’t really afford to let up more than 3 goals a game.
What troubled me last playoffs is now troubling me again: Is this management or coaching staff capable of learning from the mistakes of their collective past?
The signing showed that Gainey was still prone to a soft spot with Patrice. And, the first seven games of the season show me that Carbonneau and co. are no less immune. Heaven help us…
Outlook
In a way it was fortuitous that Brisebois played spectacularly badly in this case in a loss. And that he did not score on a knuckler to cloud affairs. If we could ever hope for this group to learn and question their ways, it will take a loss like the one we had on Saturday.
I look on now with interest to tomorrow morning for the announcement on who will be playing. I look forward to seeing how the staff reacts in their plans and game-tme decision-making.
But as with all things, the Canadiens are never quite as bad as they appeared in a loss – never quite as good as we rave they are after a win. So, although the defence was bad in Saturday night's game, the fact is that they often play just as poorly and get away with (both on the scoresheet and the broadsheet). And, another fact is that Anaheim's defence (one we would all be envious to have on paper) was pretty piss poor as well.
For me, the underlying lesson from all this is that defence in this league is difficult. Very difficult. Talking about keeping a child fist-sized piece of rubber out of a sumo wrestler-sized net is hard – more so when people actually shoot straight. Blocking 90 mph shots and rooting the puck out of the corner when 230 lb behemoths are barreling down on you is no walk in the park either.
On most occasions, the team gets away with it, usually through a combination of luck, timing and goalkeeper skill. Occasionally, two or more of these things go the wrong way and it all goes pear-shaped.
Saturday night, all three things went in the wrong direction as far as I could see. The Canadiens hit posts and legs, the Ducks (by and large) did not, the Ducks anticipated their breaks well with many players jumping in and Halak and Price were unusually useless allies.
I do believe a lot of the fault lies at the feet of the defencemen for this one. In trying to be philosophical about the loss, I mostly give them the benefit of several players all having bad nights at once.
JT at The H Does Not Stand For Habs does a fine job at calling the issues with players. For my part, I wanted to supplement her views with some views on a couple of issues that go deeper than bad luck and miscues. In my mind these are:
1) The defensive system
2) The Brisebois situation
The system of defence
From the beginning of the season, one thing was very clear to me – we would need a good goalie this year. The Canadiens coaches seem to have gone with old faithful in terms of Habs strategies – hedge your bets on goaltending. From the my first memories of hockey until now, this has been the strategy employed by management.
One can hardly argue with the idea: get a good goalie and let him stop the shots. It is both cost effective and more reliable than trying to get the job done with 6 different guys paid at variable rates. And, in Halak and Price, the Canadiens have two reliable and efficient netminders.
The problem is not with the overall premise for me, but rather with the lack of much planning beyond the initial choice of “goalie or bust”.
Signing Hamrlik was a nice move to try and instill a second tier to the plan. But it kind of stopped short there. With Roman and Markov it means that for large parts of the game we can have 5 dependable players on the ice. The problem (as we saw Saturday) was that when one of them (the lynch-pin piece, no less) goes AWOL, then 4 dependable pieces just isn’t enough.
The system is naïve, as well. Over-reliance on a goaltender hasn’t been in style since Hasek left the Sabres. Even NJ, with the best insurance policy of all, have a system to fall back on.
If the Canadiens are to achieve any kind of meaningful success this year, it will happen through improvement to this, their greatest deficiency. Someone will have to help Komisarek take the next step in development (i.e., playing the puck to the forwards) and oversee the progress of Gorges and O’Byrne.
The question of who this person will be has been raised (again by JT):
Doug Jarvis isn't necessarily doing a bad job with the D, but I can't help thinking it would be better all around to have a guy who's actually played the position offering instruction.
It’s been an issue on my mind for some time. Personally, I’m not sure if a change in personnel is necessary – possibly just a renewed focus. Teach the defencemen to be consistent, how to trust themselves in possession, how to make time and room for themselves by anticipating the play, and teach them some safe rescue manoeuvres that don’t include dumping it up the middle. The system Detroit teaches is simple: it is patience over panic.
This is salvageable. Even with the current group. They are intelligent enough, can skate and have shown they can improve. Hopefully this game will highlight that this needs to be the focus of a season’s work – readying their system for April.
Brisebois
This, unlike the former is no minor indictment. It is major in my mind. This situation keeps on rearing its head and little is done to remedy it. The fact that it took until the Anaheim game to become apparent that Brisebois is still Brisebois is surprising. The fact that he had a game like he did is not.
Now, I can rant with the best of them on how much I dislike the moments where I have to sit through 60 seconds of a Brisebois shift, but this time, that’s kind of beside the point. He is what he is. He’s trying as hard as he ever did, and his skills are diminished now (if that’s even imaginable).
This whole situation is the responsibility of the management who continues to sign this player and the coaching staff that continues to play him. The fixation on Patrice, whatever it is, is and will continue to be the Achilles’ heel of this team.
As one fan in a throng who sees things on this dossier in the same light, I am puzzled. Of course I defer to the judgment of these men on hockey specifics. But in my mind, this is not a matter of expertise, this is basic: Patrice has glaring deficiencies, he is a free agent – don’t sign him…
(The fact that Anaheim, only two days earlier, had signed Bret Hedican (+17 on a team that scored 4 more goals than they allowed) was a reminder that our signing strategy on defence was haphazard to say the least. Far from being an advocate of signing another washed-up defenceman – Hedican while not a real option perhaps just highlights how silly our own signing, so early in the summer was.)
I much prefer the idea of promoting from within because it allows for two important benefits: cheap salary and open mind. In the case of the Canadiens, they actually did have the chance to promote from within. An opportunity missed as it turns out. Shawn Belle is a former Team Canada member, has NHL experience and is good enough to be a 7th defenceman. Opinions may vary, but both Valentenko and Weber could have handled the odd assignment in the NHL too, as far as I’m concerned.
If I accept that Brisebois should have been signed (and I don’t), I still object to him starting every game, playing every game and playing in every situation. I thought he was insurance. I thought he was a fall-back position – at worst.
The problem is, while management talk about Patrice in those terms many times, they use him very differently when it comes to action time. We are not privy to the private conversations between Gainey, Gauthier, Carbonneau, Jarvis and Muller. We can only guess. But it is certain now that one of this braintrust is a Brisebois-believer, and at the very least the other 4 are not adamantly against him. I have a feeling this decision falls to the coaches, and I have an inkling which of the three it might be. In any case, that is irrelevant.
And, to be honest, Saturday represents the least of my concerns here. Although young Ryan O’Byrne, a defenceman with half a year of NHL experience, was probably wrongly benched for poor play vs. Florida, it is the memory of the playoffs that makes me uneasy here.
Last season, after the most successful run the club had had in more than a decade, the coaches decided on the eve of the playoffs to shuffle the deck. In come veterans (because that’s a winning formula in the playoffs). Even when the experiment went awry with 3 losses against a team we had (and should have continued to) dominated all season, the coaches stuck with Brisebois. The lineup was contorted to fit him in. A goalscorer was benched when we needed goals, two defenceman moved up front when we needed goals and Brisebois played and played when we couldn’t really afford to let up more than 3 goals a game.
What troubled me last playoffs is now troubling me again: Is this management or coaching staff capable of learning from the mistakes of their collective past?
The signing showed that Gainey was still prone to a soft spot with Patrice. And, the first seven games of the season show me that Carbonneau and co. are no less immune. Heaven help us…
Outlook
In a way it was fortuitous that Brisebois played spectacularly badly in this case in a loss. And that he did not score on a knuckler to cloud affairs. If we could ever hope for this group to learn and question their ways, it will take a loss like the one we had on Saturday.
I look on now with interest to tomorrow morning for the announcement on who will be playing. I look forward to seeing how the staff reacts in their plans and game-tme decision-making.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)