I’d add that to start next season the players will have a full year of Brunette’s system under their belts and will be able to focus more on the fine details as opposed to having to figure out the basics. The way they play should be more habit than thought from the start.
Series Talk: Round 1: Predators vs. Canucks
- Thread starter Predsanddead24
- Start date
- Status
101st_fan
I taught Yoda
A few very identifiable blown zone clears led to the goals against cost the team the series. It was an issue in the regular season that carried into the playoffs. Defensive lapses were a constant ... and remain an area Bruno has to address in his system moving forward.
Porter Stoutheart
We Got Wood
- Jun 14, 2017
- 14,985
- 11,361
Unfortunately, due to our lack of depth, we had to lean on players who were being used above their ability level. That's why you get a Beauvillier/Lauzon/Carrier group on that goal, when they've all shown an inability to be good players at defending in key moments of games. But we just don't have better players yet, unfortunately, when our top guys need a rest.
Seems like Brunette changed his gameplan quite dramatically heading into the playoffs, and it almost worked. They were able to play the Canucks evenly and maybe even "deserve" more wins, by playing a more careful defensive system. But there weren't enough adjustments mid-series. Part of it again though is that we don't have enough depth to be able to make meaningful personnel adjustments.
Seems like Brunette changed his gameplan quite dramatically heading into the playoffs, and it almost worked. They were able to play the Canucks evenly and maybe even "deserve" more wins, by playing a more careful defensive system. But there weren't enough adjustments mid-series. Part of it again though is that we don't have enough depth to be able to make meaningful personnel adjustments.
Preds played 6 PO games and scored 12 goals. That will not win you many series. Leading goal scorer was FF9 with 2. 10 others with 1 each. Novak had no points. And many are saying Saros lost the series. Sure he gave up some goals but the O did not show up for him. You can't win many with a 2 goals for avg. Of course Juuse only gave up 12 with 1 EN goal so he gave the Preds plenty of goalie support. The O played against 3 different Nucks goalies in 6 games and could beat their backups going 1-3.
All of that is true and don't disagree with any of it. We have to get better offensively. But I will say this- playoff hockey is an entirely different beast. It is HARD to score goals even if you have elite offensive talent.
Vancouver scored one more goal than we did. Boston scored 3 total regulation goals in their last 3 games in the Leafs series- and won. Toronto has scored 2 or fewer goals in 13 of their last 14 playoff games. (that is absolutely mind boggling). Stars scored 5 goals in their last 3 games.
We gotta get deeper and better on offense, but in the playoffs it is incredibly hard to score regardless.
When a goalie gives up weak goals though, it changes how you play offense.
Porter Stoutheart
We Got Wood
- Jun 14, 2017
- 14,985
- 11,361
I don't think our gameplan at any point in the whole series was to generate offense, though?
Which I find interesting. I guess one can argue chicken and egg and how much credit to give Vancouver for stifling our attempts. But it sure seemed to me like our team changed gameplan extensively relative to the regular season, from the outset, trying to play a more conservative style and choking off the opposition and limiting opportunity both ways, independent of any goaltending events.
I'm not saying it was a bad idea, though... it actually almost worked, since we did play them very close and possibly deserved a better outcome in a couple games, with a couple better bounces or attention to detail in key moments. But it was nevertheless a change in style. We didn't have the depth/personnel to play run-and-gun with Vancouver, maybe that was an object lesson from the regular season matchups, and the team definitely was not looking at generating offense the same way in the playoff matchup.
I will just say that I don't think we were the only team employing this strategy. Just seems like most games in round 1 overall looked very similar to our games vs Vancouver.I don't think our gameplan at any point in the whole series was to generate offense, though?
Which I find interesting. I guess one can argue chicken and egg and how much credit to give Vancouver for stifling our attempts. But it sure seemed to me like our team changed gameplan extensively relative to the regular season, from the outset, trying to play a more conservative style and choking off the opposition and limiting opportunity both ways, independent of any goaltending events.
I'm not saying it was a bad idea, though... it actually almost worked, since we did play them very close and possibly deserved a better outcome in a couple games, with a couple better bounces or attention to detail in key moments. But it was nevertheless a change in style. We didn't have the depth/personnel to play run-and-gun with Vancouver, maybe that was an object lesson from the regular season matchups, and the team definitely was not looking at generating offense the same way in the playoff matchup.
I really thought the determinant of the series was the power play and odd man hockey. We really couldn't generate much of anything, including moment on the power play. I wouldn't say either team was overly successful, but certainly their odd man hockey was better than ours and I believe won them the series.
Porter Stoutheart
We Got Wood
- Jun 14, 2017
- 14,985
- 11,361
This is very true. The shots on goal went down, and hits stats went up, in a lot of the series. Teams were playing it tight and physical all across the board.
It's funny, in the old days I think most of us would have said the playoffs were a more "entertaining" form of hockey. With intensity ramping up across the board. Of course when your own team is involved in do-or-die moments, that adds entertainment value too. But even as a neutral observer of other games, the spectacle seemed more entertaining? I'm not sure I would say that about the other playoff games from other series that I've watched this year. It has been a lot more boring/stifling kind of play...
Agree completely- its like everyone plays so tight and almost like a "play not to lose" mentality.This is very true. The shots on goal went down, and hits stats went up, in a lot of the series. Teams were playing it tight and physical all across the board.
It's funny, in the old days I think most of us would have said the playoffs were a more "entertaining" form of hockey. With intensity ramping up across the board. Of course when your own team is involved in do-or-die moments, that adds entertainment value too. But even as a neutral observer of other games, the spectacle seemed more entertaining? I'm not sure I would say that about the other playoff games from other series that I've watched this year. It has been a lot more boring/stifling kind of play...
Porter Stoutheart
We Got Wood
- Jun 14, 2017
- 14,985
- 11,361
I watched the two Game 7s... yikes... that is supposed to be the most exciting hockey ever. And it was painful, an exercise in watching paint dry at times.
ChuckFanForever
Registered User
- Jun 5, 2011
- 159
- 51
This Preds fan says about 15 mins in that Canucks were the 8th team in NHL history to do it:
- Aug 13, 2007
- 35,501
- 15,775
@AtlantaWhaler Can we please close this f***ing thread? I'm ready for it to fade into sweet oblivion
AtlantaWhaler
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
- Jul 3, 2009
- 19,735
- 2,964
- Status
