SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Toronto Maple Leafs

Are Toronto’s Struggles A Matter Of Tactical Deployment Errors?

21 juin 2022 à 23 h 39
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2022
Messages: 961
Mentions "j'aime": 148
Modifié 28 juin 2022 à 11 h 27
Watching the team’s execution the past 3 seasons I’ve noticed that the issues that hold them back are relatively similar, not finding ways to score despite outshooting the opposition substantially, and making 1 mistake in a pivotal moment to lose the game. At some point you have to ask yourself if these so called “psychological errors” or “physical talent issues” or “effort issues” are actually because of the team’s tactical deployment?

Maybe the team’s inability to convert on an abundance of chances isn’t due to “poor finishing” or “lack of killer instinct” or “playoff variance.” Maybe it’s cuz the opposition has analyzed the formation TOR likes to use on the cycle to move the puck through traffic & have suffocated them from finding those seams that open up cross slot passes for the goalie to move. Maybe those neutral zone turnovers aren’t due to “lack of focus” or “trying to do too much.” Maybe the opposition has set up in a formation that prevents the TOR skaters from getting to the support positions they were instructed to go to on the breakout, therefore, the puck carrier gets trapped and turns it over? Maybe in the offensive zone, they don’t have a path to carry it through traffic so they force it and turn it over?

I’m not saying this is for sure the issue and I’m not saying Toronto needs to overhaul the coaching staff, but I do wonder if the team is not adapting well enough based on the execution tendencies of the opponent. Like instead of trying to force the opposition to adapt to your setup, you should look more into how the opposition sets up to neutralize your formation and make changes to your formation or the way the players move to get to certain positions to throw off the opposition. Maybe in this aspect the Leafs coaching staff needs to improve?
jaok3 et LaffsFan a aimé ceci.
22 juin 2022 à 0 h 0
#2
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2022
Messages: 961
Mentions "j'aime": 148
Sorry for the tag guys but what are your thoughts on this issue?
Saskleaf et felixf21 a aimé ceci.
22 juin 2022 à 0 h 11
#3
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 3,922
Mentions "j'aime": 587
Not to put too simplistically, but Keefe is still growing on the job. He's a good coach, not a great coach. Cassidy, Torts, and Cooper have outcoached him in the playoffs in the last three years. And as they should, since they have way more experience.

I like Keefe, but he can definitely get better.
Saskleaf, felixf21 et Britishbulldog a aimé ceci.
22 juin 2022 à 0 h 11
#4
Go leafs go
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2020
Messages: 13,179
Mentions "j'aime": 9,152
Quoting: Analytics_are_good
Sorry for the tag guys but what are your thoughts on this issue?


I've always been so-so with Keefe. Never thought he was a good coach. Never thought he was a bad one either. He's pretty much the definition of an average coach. If they can get someone like Barry Trotz, do it. If not, keep Keefe. That's my take.
felixf21 a aimé ceci.
22 juin 2022 à 0 h 12
#5
H.Lindholm Lover
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2021
Messages: 3,598
Mentions "j'aime": 921
this years loss to tampa bay wasnt alarming. we nrought the back to back cup champs to 7 games, almost had them in 6 and got unlucky because of holls interference. its not like last year. stick with the core, try to bring jack back. move holl, kerfoot and mrazek and get a trustable backup like comrie is what i expect to see. and if campbell dosent come back i expect to see stolarz
Saskleaf a aimé ceci.
22 juin 2022 à 0 h 41
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2021
Messages: 347
Mentions "j'aime": 82
Definitely think Keefe needs to be better, we improved the assistants last year adding Carbery and Chenoweth, and moving Malhotra off the pp. Keefe needs to get better at making adjustments and doing so early enough in a game. Not really related but goalie coaching has been an issue as well. I think if we do move on from Keefe, it's cause dubas and maybe Shanahan are gone as well. I would have liked to go after some of the available coaches this year especially Cassidy.
22 juin 2022 à 1 h 46
#7
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2019
Messages: 2,744
Mentions "j'aime": 2,601
Overall, I did not have a huge issue with generally the team's effort in the series vs Tampa except maybe times like when Nylander could have hustled a bit more (those who watched the games know what I'm talking about).

Tactically? Yeah I think think Keefe has a long way to go and am not sure this core group has enough time left for Keefe to figure out tactics.

What do I mean by that? Well I pointed out in another thread about having home ice advantage and so why didn't Keefe double shift Matthews and Marner together and separately to get more favorable matchups?

How come it took til game 6 for Tavares to be a factor in the series? Sure we can look at the players but some of this has to be on the coach too.

Why aren't more people here asking these kind of questions? I don't like how Dubas and Shanahan were okay with things at the year end press conference.

I'm asking you guys, why wasn't Keefe doing some of these things in this series?
22 juin 2022 à 5 h 5
#8
Marner rocks
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2021
Messages: 3,878
Mentions "j'aime": 869
Quoting: Analytics_are_good
I see a lot of Leaf fans on my timeline debating on what went wrong during this season’s elimination to Tampa, a part of the base is blaming the GM for recruiting inadequate players and dismissing options that were superior. Others are questioning the players for being too psychologically fragile & always making clumsy mistakes in critical moments. But I don’t see anyone challenging the coaching staff and their system.

Watching the team’s execution the past 3 seasons I’ve noticed that the issues that hold them back are relatively similar, not finding ways to score despite outshooting the opposition substantially, and making 1 mistake in a pivotal moment to lose the game. At some point you have to ask yourself if these so called “psychological errors” or “physical talent issues” are actually because of the team’s tactical deployment?

Maybe the team’s inability to convert on an abundance of chances isn’t due to “poor finishing” or “lack of killer instinct” or “playoff variance.” Maybe it’s cuz the opposition has analyzed the formation TOR likes to use on the cycle to move the puck through traffic & have suffocated them from getting to those areas so that they are forced to shoot from uncomfortable / unfamiliar position. Maybe those neutral zone turnovers aren’t due to “lack of focus” or “trying to do too much.” Maybe the opposition has set up in a formation that prevents the TOR skaters from getting to the support positions they were instructed to go to on the breakout, therefore, the puck carrier gets trapped and turns it over?

I’m not saying this is for sure the issue and I’m not saying Toronto needs to overhaul the coaching staff, but I do wonder if this team is falling into a trap that many coaches seem to get caught in. They feel that to win, they need to implement a game plan that forces the opposition to adapt to them, instead of adapting based on how the opposition plays. Maybe they’re trying to force themselves to make the same strategy work even though it’s already been neutralized.

From my experience a large part of a coach’s focus was constantly identifying ways for his skaters to get to the formation he wants them to set up in, that often requires minor adjustments like changing what route a certain player takes or altering where one stands to throw off the opponent, sometimes we have to change the formation altogether to play certain teams. Maybe in this aspect the Leafs coaching staff needs to improve?


I've thought they have been out coached every series since Marner and Matthews have become leafs. For example, your topline doesn't start the game till the 3rd shift. I'd like to know the league stat on too many men on the ice penalties.
oneX a aimé ceci.
22 juin 2022 à 11 h 37
#9
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2019
Messages: 2,744
Mentions "j'aime": 2,601
Quoting: jaok3
I've thought they have been out coached every series since Marner and Matthews have become leafs. For example, your topline doesn't start the game till the 3rd shift. I'd like to know the league stat on too many men on the ice penalties.


I forgot to bring up the too many men penalty. This is inexusible to have this penalty called on you as many times as it happened. Add it the list of things I mentioned above.
22 juin 2022 à 15 h 52
#10
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2020
Messages: 43
Mentions "j'aime": 11
Quoting: Analytics_are_good

- a part of the base is blaming the GM for recruiting inadequate players and dismissing options that were superior.
- Others are questioning the players for being too psychologically fragile & always making clumsy mistakes in critical moments. But I don’t see anyone challenging the coaching staff and their system.
- not finding ways to score despite outshooting the opposition substantially
- making 1 mistake in a pivotal moment to lose the game. At some point you have to ask yourself if these so called “psychological errors” or “physical talent issues” are actually because of the team’s tactical deployment?
- they need to implement a game plan that forces the opposition to adapt to them, instead of adapting based on how the opposition plays. Maybe they’re trying to force themselves to make the same strategy work even though it’s already been neutralized.
- Maybe in this aspect the Leafs coaching staff needs to improve?


Taking some of your points I want to respond to.
- The most annoying thing about Leafs fans is listening to them complain about things they have no experience in. It's mind numbing how myopic the average Leafs fan actually is. Dubas has collected the greatest array of talent this city has ever seen and people will still say they are not good enough. Even the idea of getting "this player" or "that player" be it through draft, trade or signing is still a crap shoot. There is no formula or magic bag of beans to make even the best players available mesh with those you already have. It's the most consistent story in sports... it's not about the player, it's about the team. Some players just don't work with others or in a certain coaching system. All you can do is "homework" and try your luck. Dubas is not to blame for Foligno, Richie, Mrazek or Simmonds. He's also not responsible for how a team responds under pressure or in a match-up with another team. That's the teams responsibility. The GM is just the convenient fall-guy. I would however blame a GM for extremely bad signings, a stupid trade or being complacent. Dubas has put forth amazing effort to try and make this team better. It has worked each year... but the TEAM still falls short - not the GM.

- I think this year the team showed resilience and a dogged determination to keep fighting. That's an enormous step forward from the collapse against Montreal. It's no longer a relevant point. Toronto took the two-time defending champions to 7 games and the brink of elimination. Tampa knew how to win, they dug in and rode out the storm and Toronto fell short against a team playing for their third Stanley Cup.

- Ummm, I completely disagree. More times than not this team scores at will.

- It's funny how the only time anyone really notices a mistake is when it's the team your watching. Tampa made plenty of mistakes, they were less noticeable because your not paying as much attention to the opposition as one would their own team. The question I like to ask people is "Why do you want a game that's utterly flawless.... how is that even possible"? A team sport is NOT a Grandmaster tournament in chess where a single error can destroy your entire game. A mistake in sports is always followed by a chance to rectify the error and get back in the game. Hockey is not a game of mathematics... or patience - it's a game of action and consequence. The mistake is not the issue... the response is. ANd I don't think the Leafs responded any more or less poorly than any other team. They played well and lost to a better team.

- I would agree to a point. I think your should go farther and say they need to do both - adapt to the opposition and force adaption to their system. Tampa in particular excels at adapting. Toronto does as well, but Tampa adapted better. It seems like a moot point really. I will add that I do notice Toronto's offensive break-outs tend to be predictable. I find myslelf often telling my wife what they are going to do before it even happens in the next play.

- Scotty Bowman was the best coach in NHL history. He never stopped adapting... and neither does our coaching staff. It's an illogical conclusion to come to without actually being within the coaching staff or management. I mean you can't hear what they say on the bench or dressing room... so how could we conclude that they were not adapting? Perhaps they adapted too much... is that not also a failure in adapting? Perhaps they adapted perfectly but one player failed to execute at the right moment and a completely different change of events happened, ie; an action and a consequence. Perhaps a butterfly flapped it's wings in the Amazon and cause a snowstorm in Siberia.

My point with all this being.... you're over analyzing, splitting hairs and grasping at straws.
They lost to a better team.
Plain and simple.
25 juin 2022 à 21 h 6
#11
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2022
Messages: 961
Mentions "j'aime": 148
Quoting: X27
Taking some of your points I want to respond to.
- The most annoying thing about Leafs fans is listening to them complain about things they have no experience in. It's mind numbing how myopic the average Leafs fan actually is. Dubas has collected the greatest array of talent this city has ever seen and people will still say they are not good enough. Even the idea of getting "this player" or "that player" be it through draft, trade or signing is still a crap shoot. There is no formula or magic bag of beans to make even the best players available mesh with those you already have. It's the most consistent story in sports... it's not about the player, it's about the team. Some players just don't work with others or in a certain coaching system. All you can do is "homework" and try your luck. Dubas is not to blame for Foligno, Richie, Mrazek or Simmonds. He's also not responsible for how a team responds under pressure or in a match-up with another team. That's the teams responsibility. The GM is just the convenient fall-guy. I would however blame a GM for extremely bad signings, a stupid trade or being complacent. Dubas has put forth amazing effort to try and make this team better. It has worked each year... but the TEAM still falls short - not the GM.

- I think this year the team showed resilience and a dogged determination to keep fighting. That's an enormous step forward from the collapse against Montreal. It's no longer a relevant point. Toronto took the two-time defending champions to 7 games and the brink of elimination. Tampa knew how to win, they dug in and rode out the storm and Toronto fell short against a team playing for their third Stanley Cup.

- Ummm, I completely disagree. More times than not this team scores at will.

- It's funny how the only time anyone really notices a mistake is when it's the team your watching. Tampa made plenty of mistakes, they were less noticeable because your not paying as much attention to the opposition as one would their own team. The question I like to ask people is "Why do you want a game that's utterly flawless.... how is that even possible"? A team sport is NOT a Grandmaster tournament in chess where a single error can destroy your entire game. A mistake in sports is always followed by a chance to rectify the error and get back in the game. Hockey is not a game of mathematics... or patience - it's a game of action and consequence. The mistake is not the issue... the response is. ANd I don't think the Leafs responded any more or less poorly than any other team. They played well and lost to a better team.

- I would agree to a point. I think your should go farther and say they need to do both - adapt to the opposition and force adaption to their system. Tampa in particular excels at adapting. Toronto does as well, but Tampa adapted better. It seems like a moot point really. I will add that I do notice Toronto's offensive break-outs tend to be predictable. I find myslelf often telling my wife what they are going to do before it even happens in the next play.

- Scotty Bowman was the best coach in NHL history. He never stopped adapting... and neither does our coaching staff. It's an illogical conclusion to come to without actually being within the coaching staff or management. I mean you can't hear what they say on the bench or dressing room... so how could we conclude that they were not adapting? Perhaps they adapted too much... is that not also a failure in adapting? Perhaps they adapted perfectly but one player failed to execute at the right moment and a completely different change of events happened, ie; an action and a consequence. Perhaps a butterfly flapped it's wings in the Amazon and cause a snowstorm in Siberia.

My point with all this being.... you're over analyzing, splitting hairs and grasping at straws.
They lost to a better team.
Plain and simple.


We can’t continue to use the idea that “we faced a better team” as a reason to justify the loss. If you want to win the cup you have to win against your opponent no matter how good they are, every team that’s won during their first breakthrough has had to face at least 1 team with more pedigree than them. Do you remember the Penguins first cup run under Mike Sullivan? No one gave them a chance with that D core and forward depth, people predicted a 1 and done in round 1. But elite coaches can elevate unproven / low talent players & make them effective, they’re not here to make these types of excuses about the opposition having more talent on paper.

Second, I’m not sure which players we specifically look at when talking about poor/underperforming players. There’s not 1 guy that specifically stands out, just everyone is having the same issue. They can’t make a breakout pass, can’t find a seam on the cycle. Everyone says we need to get players with better puck carrying ability, better buildup skills, the ability to pass through traffic, better transition defencemen. But if everyone on the team struggles with every fundamental skill, then maybe it’s not that the players aren’t talented or smart. Maybe the way the formation that doesn’t allow the support players to give the puck carrier a clear path to transport it from one area to another? Maybe they can’t find seams on the cycle cuz the way players are instructed to move from one area to another doesn’t provide anyone enough space to make a pass through traffic?
26 juin 2022 à 0 h 52
#12
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 9,193
Mentions "j'aime": 5,554
Modifié 26 juin 2022 à 0 h 59
Quoting: Analytics_are_good
We can’t continue to use the idea that “we faced a better team” as a reason to justify the loss. If you want to win the cup you have to win against your opponent no matter how good they are, every team that’s won during their first breakthrough has had to face at least 1 team with more pedigree than them. Do you remember the Penguins first cup run under Mike Sullivan? No one gave them a chance with that D core and forward depth, people predicted a 1 and done in round 1. But elite coaches can elevate unproven / low talent players & make them effective, they’re not here to make these types of excuses about the opposition having more talent on paper.

Second, I’m not sure which players we specifically look at when talking about poor/underperforming players. There’s not 1 guy that specifically stands out, just everyone is having the same issue. They can’t make a breakout pass, can’t find a seam on the cycle. Everyone says we need to get players with better puck carrying ability, better buildup skills, the ability to pass through traffic, better transition defencemen. But if everyone on the team struggles with every fundamental skill, then maybe it’s not that the players aren’t talented or smart. Maybe the way the formation that doesn’t allow the support players to give the puck carrier a clear path to transport it from one area to another? Maybe they can’t find seams on the cycle cuz the way players are instructed to move from one area to another doesn’t provide anyone enough space to make a pass through traffic?


Looking at something from a position of: "we lost therefore we must have done something wrong" isn't actually a legitimate way of eval. Not in hockey, not in science, not in business, not in anything. If you go looking for demons, you'll find them. The problem is that when done this way they tend to be in your head and not real (or to be more precise - blown way out of proportion).

Do you want to know the actual 'reason'? Hockey is a slot machine and two evenly matched teams will produce results that look exactly like this. There are smaller things to work on for sure (see below), but at the end of the day two major calls going in one teams direction at pivotal moments (P3 11:59 game 6 being the big one) is more than enough to tip the scales.

Smaller things:

The Leafs are a heavy cycle team (this isn't actually a bad thing). Many fans have noticed it when we go long periods of time in the Ozone with pressure where we don't actually manage to get a shot or opportunity off and that can be frustrating. It does tend to work out but when so much of your offense is based around the cycle it becomes (a little bit) easier to counter in a series of games compared to one offs in the regular season. A fix to this would be to work on expanding our ability to generate offence off the rush at much higher levels. We had individual players capable of doing this but the team tactically wasn't invested in it so it was never sustained or part of the game plan except for small situations (like our PK where it was very effective although even then it was momentary and not sustained)

Further to that point our defensive ability off the rush is where we give up most of our chances against. Nearly every other aspect has improved dramatically (to the point where our D is underratedly good) however rush D continues to be vulnerable and is a weakness that coaches continue to exploit against us. This being so weak is one of the key reasons why we lose to bad teams in such dramatic ways so often as we can easily fall victim to Carlyle puck - a staple of bad teams.

The thing that Tampa has over us essentially is that they are famously able to swap between a cycle or a rush based team dependent on who they play and we are unable to. That doesn't mean we are bad, it doesn't even mean we aren't good. Its really ****ing hard to be excellent at one let alone both.


At the end of the day, if that phantom call doesn't happen in game 6 we probably aren't having this convo and I think that should say all you need to know about how few issues the team actually has. So roster wise fixes should be minimal outside of maintenance. The needed tactical adjustments can be made without a coaching change (if they don't happen then we can start talking about it), and hire Mitch Korn to be the goalie coach ffs.
Trickster a aimé ceci.
26 juin 2022 à 21 h 0
#13
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2022
Messages: 961
Mentions "j'aime": 148
I see.
26 juin 2022 à 21 h 1
#14
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2022
Messages: 961
Mentions "j'aime": 148
Quoting: Random2152
Looking at something from a position of: "we lost therefore we must have done something wrong" isn't actually a legitimate way of eval. Not in hockey, not in science, not in business, not in anything. If you go looking for demons, you'll find them. The problem is that when done this way they tend to be in your head and not real (or to be more precise - blown way out of proportion).

Do you want to know the actual 'reason'? Hockey is a slot machine and two evenly matched teams will produce results that look exactly like this. There are smaller things to work on for sure (see below), but at the end of the day two major calls going in one teams direction at pivotal moments (P3 11:59 game 6 being the big one) is more than enough to tip the scales.

Smaller things:

The Leafs are a heavy cycle team (this isn't actually a bad thing). Many fans have noticed it when we go long periods of time in the Ozone with pressure where we don't actually manage to get a shot or opportunity off and that can be frustrating. It does tend to work out but when so much of your offense is based around the cycle it becomes (a little bit) easier to counter in a series of games compared to one offs in the regular season. A fix to this would be to work on expanding our ability to generate offence off the rush at much higher levels. We had individual players capable of doing this but the team tactically wasn't invested in it so it was never sustained or part of the game plan except for small situations (like our PK where it was very effective although even then it was momentary and not sustained)

Further to that point our defensive ability off the rush is where we give up most of our chances against. Nearly every other aspect has improved dramatically (to the point where our D is underratedly good) however rush D continues to be vulnerable and is a weakness that coaches continue to exploit against us. This being so weak is one of the key reasons why we lose to bad teams in such dramatic ways so often as we can easily fall victim to Carlyle puck - a staple of bad teams.

The thing that Tampa has over us essentially is that they are famously able to swap between a cycle or a rush based team dependent on who they play and we are unable to. That doesn't mean we are bad, it doesn't even mean we aren't good. Its really ****ing hard to be excellent at one let alone both.


At the end of the day, if that phantom call doesn't happen in game 6 we probably aren't having this convo and I think that should say all you need to know about how few issues the team actually has. So roster wise fixes should be minimal outside of maintenance. The needed tactical adjustments can be made without a coaching change (if they don't happen then we can start talking about it), and hire Mitch Korn to be the goalie coach ffs.


Thanks for the feedback. Yeah for sure I’m not saying the overall body of work was bad, they were definitely close and there was no doubt some luck factored into the final result. But I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks there are smaller details they need to improve in terms of execution.

I agree on both strategies that you mentioned, but the thing that confuses me is that it seems the team does very well off the rush in the regular season, like it seemed that 65, 64, 15 and 47 were constantly able to find ways to counter attack. I’m not sure if the playoff ineffectiveness is due to not being willing to work for those chances or if the formation they use to get those chances has been neutralized? I also felt like the cycle offence was more effective in the regular season, weren’t they first in goals off sustained o-zone pressure? A lot of people say that the game is tighter but do they mean that there’s more emphasis on adjustments?
26 juin 2022 à 23 h 40
#15
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 9,193
Mentions "j'aime": 5,554
Quoting: Analytics_are_good
but the thing that confuses me is that it seems the team does very well off the rush in the regular season, like it seemed that 65, 64, 15 and 47 were constantly able to find ways to counter attack.


The overwhelming majority or the Leafs offence comes off the cycle (numbers back this up but I cannot find anything on hand to nicely display right now so you'll have to trust me). Very little comes off the rush. If you actually watch what those players did when they got those rush chances, when they entered the zone they started a cycle instead of going for chances. This is often seen as that curling back thing you may have noticed. They all do that. So even though they get rushes, they don't actually convert them into rush offence, they convert them into cycle offence. That is a tactical choice driven into them by the coaching staff. Again, not a bad thing. The cycle is very efficient and has been effective for us but we need to have an alternative for when it doesn't work and that adjustment has been an issue.

Quoting: Analytics_are_good
I’m not sure if the playoff ineffectiveness is due to not being willing to work for those chances or if the formation they use to get those chances has been neutralized?

I also felt like the cycle offence was more effective in the regular season, weren’t they first in goals off sustained o-zone pressure? A lot of people say that the game is tighter but do they mean that there’s more emphasis on adjustments?


Has nothing to do with work ethic. That explanation has always been a hockey man cope. Ignore it. Defences tighten up in the playoffs due to series play and you need to be able to adjust as the series goes on. Having a 2nd trick up your sleeve - even if not as effective that you can pull out in an emergency can help to disorganise a defence and open up space to create opportunities. Basically don't be a 1 trick pony. There is a reason we keep getting 'goalied'
28 juin 2022 à 10 h 35
#16
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2022
Messages: 961
Mentions "j'aime": 148
Quoting: Random2152
The overwhelming majority or the Leafs offence comes off the cycle (numbers back this up but I cannot find anything on hand to nicely display right now so you'll have to trust me). Very little comes off the rush. If you actually watch what those players did when they got those rush chances, when they entered the zone they started a cycle instead of going for chances. This is often seen as that curling back thing you may have noticed. They all do that. So even though they get rushes, they don't actually convert them into rush offence, they convert them into cycle offence. That is a tactical choice driven into them by the coaching staff. Again, not a bad thing. The cycle is very efficient and has been effective for us but we need to have an alternative for when it doesn't work and that adjustment has been an issue.



Has nothing to do with work ethic. That explanation has always been a hockey man cope. Ignore it. Defences tighten up in the playoffs due to series play and you need to be able to adjust as the series goes on. Having a 2nd trick up your sleeve - even if not as effective that you can pull out in an emergency can help to disorganise a defence and open up space to create opportunities. Basically don't be a 1 trick pony. There is a reason we keep getting 'goalied'


Yeah I agree, I don’t think it’s an effort issue and I don’t think it’s entirely on luck that we keep getting goalied. They need to be more efficient and adaptive in terms of strategy for sure. Rush offence will help and I wonder if changing the way they set up on the cycle will help as well. Like maybe one player going to a different area or taking a different path to get to that formational position, make it unpredictable for the defending team.
28 juin 2022 à 11 h 30
#17
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2022
Messages: 961
Mentions "j'aime": 148
What’r ur thoughts on this?
28 juin 2022 à 11 h 45
#18
Leafs Sufferer
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2019
Messages: 4,073
Mentions "j'aime": 3,511
Quoting: Analytics_are_good
What’r ur thoughts on this?


I don't think I could add too much to what's already been said.

We've got young kids who are bearing the weight of the (Toronto hockey) world on their shoulders, and a "young" coach expected to lead them. It's frustrating to keep losing in the first round, but it sure is better than taking a step backwards every year.

Everyone will continue to learn from the mistakes that have been made, and the results will come.

If COL has taught us anything, it's patience. It's difficult to be patient, but it's necessary for everyone's mental health. Took Mac 9 years to win his first, and EJ even longer.
Britishbulldog a aimé ceci.
28 juin 2022 à 11 h 59
#19
Trad Breliving
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2020
Messages: 3,492
Mentions "j'aime": 1,989
I like Keefe, honestly.

He’s won at almost every level of hockey, except the NHL. This tells us he can get better. Just like players, Keefe will learn and adapt.

Just 4 years ago, Sakic/Bednar was voted worst GM/Coach duo in the league. Now look where they are.

Patience. That’s really it.
Britishbulldog a aimé ceci.
28 juin 2022 à 20 h 52
#20
Hakuna Matata
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2020
Messages: 33,185
Mentions "j'aime": 20,724
Quoting: ZachHymanForTheHart
I like Keefe, honestly.

He’s won at almost every level of hockey, except the NHL. This tells us he can get better. Just like players, Keefe will learn and adapt.

Just 4 years ago, Sakic/Bednar was voted worst GM/Coach duo in the league. Now look where they are.

Patience. That’s really it.


Gonna just add to your point





Keefe in his first full season lead them to their best season and if it wasn't for a phantom call in game 6 who knows maybe Toronto would have been the ones battling the Avalanche in the finals

For those wondering the phantom call https://twitter.com/frank_seravalli/status/1524934083578568719?s=21&t=Q5tEpiraKGkzJl5J2dWxvA
ZachHymanForTheHart a aimé ceci.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage