Analysis of Lack of 5v5 Scoring

[vis]

https://theathletic.com/93906/2017/09/05/can-the-flyers-fix-their-5-on-5-goal-scoring-issues-in-2017-18/

 

I have bagged on Charlie O'Connor before, but this is really solid analysis that, imo, is definitely backed up by the eye test.  I have felt that the lack of 5v5 scoring is mainly a systemic issue, though I do think age is catching up to some players, e.g., Giroux.  I don't understand why Hakstol relied so heavily on the d-men last year given the defensive corps they had in place.  Remember at one point the Flyers d-men were ranked first in terms of scoring?  Yes, that is an indictment of the forwards to a degree, but really it's the result of the system employed by Hakstol.  Given the defensive talent in the pipeline, perhaps the system will be much more effective in the future.  Maybe Hakstol is just trying to lay that groundwork for that now.  And maybe with some new offensive talent, you will see some other things open up in the o-zone and even an increase in shooting percentage.

 

Also, maybe worth noting, during the 10-game win streak, the Flyers had a ridiculous shooting percentage if I recall correctly.  Something close to 12%.  Shows just how much of an aberration (and mirage) that 10-game streak was.

[King Knut]

16 minutes ago, vis said:

https://theathletic.com/93906/2017/09/05/can-the-flyers-fix-their-5-on-5-goal-scoring-issues-in-2017-18/

 

I have bagged on Charlie O'Connor before, but this is really solid analysis that, imo, is definitely backed up by the eye test.  I have felt that the lack of 5v5 scoring is mainly a systemic issue, though I do think age is catching up to some players, e.g., Giroux.  I don't understand why Hakstol relied so heavily on the d-men last year given the defensive corps they had in place.  Remember at one point the Flyers d-men were ranked first in terms of scoring?  Yes, that is an indictment of the forwards to a degree, but really it's the result of the system employed by Hakstol.  Given the defensive talent in the pipeline, perhaps the system will be much more effective in the future.  Maybe Hakstol is just trying to lay that groundwork for that now.  And maybe with some new offensive talent, you will see some other things open up in the o-zone and even an increase in shooting percentage.

 

Also, maybe worth noting, during the 10-game win streak, the Flyers had a ridiculous shooting percentage if I recall correctly.  Something close to 12%.  Shows just how much of an aberration (and mirage) that 10-game streak was.

 

Can't Wait to read this.

[hf101]

17 hours ago, vis said:

I don't understand why Hakstol relied so heavily on the d-men last year given the defensive corps they had in place.

 

The lack of size and strength down the middle of the first line is one reason Hakstol relied on shots from the point and the fact that we didn't really have a #2 center who passed the puck with any skill until the trade deadline was the 2nd biggest factor.  Giroux's line struggled the entire year at 5 on 5 keeping the puck in the offensive zone as Jake struggles with making a tape to tape pass in transition. They rarely initiated a set play from behind the net.  I have to also fault the struggles of Ghost putting the puck on net most of the season for the 5 on 5 play.   The idea to use Streit, Ghost, and Gudas as shot generators on the top 3 lines wasn't a horrible decision by Hakstol, but they needed more diversity in the game plan.

[OccamsRazor]

2 hours ago, hf101 said:

#2 center who passed the puck with any skill until the trade deadline was the 2nd biggest factor.

 

Yes this was huge.

 

It is why with a good camp/preseason Patrick can steal this spot and help a lot to improve the puck possession and breakout a lot. It is one of the reason Schenn was traded....he just isn't a center you want handling and lugging the puck up ice.

 

The best thing he could do was receive it and either shoot it on net or pass it to someone. 

 

Coots needs to be slotted on the 3rd it is where he fits in and can play a big role.

 

Another facet is they need to find someone eventually this year to play opposite of Ivan....Mcdud ain't it.

 

This isn't meant to be another Mcdud bashing comment but with that duo on the ice as much as they will be required Ivan needs to have more skill as his partner.

 

It is why i would love for Radko to be given every opportunity to fill that need till Myers is ready to be slotted as his partner sometime next year.

[elmatus]

8 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

Another facet is they need to find someone eventually this year to play opposite of Ivan....Mcdud ain't it.

 

This isn't meant to be another Mcdud bashing comment but with that duo on the ice as much as they will be required Ivan needs to have more skill as his partner.

 

It is why i would love for Radko to be given every opportunity to fill that need till Myers is ready to be slotted as his partner sometime next year.

 

It's an interesting idea for sure. As solid as Provo was last season, the fact remains he was constantly having to bail out his far less capable partner. I'd be interested to see what he can do with a partner that can compliment him rather than weigh him down.

 

Of course, the challenge of McDud will still be a problem. Provo is at least good enough to compensate for McDud's failings. I'm not sure any other of current crop would be able to do so. Unless they keep seven dmen around and just have McDud riding the bench for most of the season, I'm not sure where else they can fit him. That also seems like a waste of a roster spot.

[OccamsRazor]

18 minutes ago, elmatus said:

 

Of course, the challenge of McDud will still be a problem.

 

 

Sure. But it could fair better on say the bottom pair against lesser talent. Much harder for him on the 1st pair going against the other team's top lineup.

 

Myself i prefer to scratch him or just waive him to the Phantoms.

 

But Hak and Hextall think he can be used in the pros i guess...but if that is the case lower the pressure on him by dropping him down to the bottom would go a long ways.

 

Like this:

 

Ivan-Radko

Morin-Ghost

Hagg-Mcdud

Manning

 

[Podein25]

18 hours ago, vis said:

 I don't understand why Hakstol relied so heavily on the d-men last year given the defensive corps they had in place. Remember at one point the Flyers d-men were ranked first in terms of scoring?  Yes, that is an indictment of the forwards to a degree, but really it's the result of the system employed by Hakstol.

 

As a hockey player who has played both forward and D, I find this statement to not ring true. Who cares if it's the D that are doing the scoring? So two one things:

 

1. Shots from point are neither inherently bad or good, they're entirely neutral. The only thing that matters is whether you can a) get a shot through to the net, and b) there is something to either block the goalies view or change the direction or both.  In the absence of those two things,  it's quite possibly a giveaway and should be recorded that way  instead of as a useless shot.

 

In reality of course, there's not a lot of time to make decisions back there or wait for a screen or whatever, and so it becomes about retaining possession, no?

 

Low-to-High. Good grief.

[murraycraven]

27 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

 

As a hockey player who has played both forward and D, I find this statement to not ring true. Who cares if it's the D that are doing the scoring? So two one things:

 

1. Shots from point are neither inherently bad or good, they're entirely neutral. The only thing that matters is whether you can a) get a shot through to the net, and b) there is something to either block the goalies view or change the direction or both.  In the absence of those two things,  it's quite possibly a giveaway and should be recorded that way  instead of as a useless shot.

 

In reality of course, there's not a lot of time to make decisions back there or wait for a screen or whatever, and so it becomes about retaining possession, no?

 

Low-to-High. Good grief.

 

 

If Hak's idea of creating offense is to bring it back to the defense then we have an entirely different issue.   The fact remains that outside of a few players this team is not tough in front of the net and seemingly prefers to play the perimeter.   As good as the article is I think this is a pretty straightforward issue - quality scoring changes will result in more goals.   Playing the perimeter and trying to make the perfect pass is not going to produce goals....  

[vis]

3 hours ago, hf101 said:

 

The lack of size and strength down the middle of the first line is one reason Hakstol relied on shots from the point and the fact that we didn't really have a #2 center who passed the puck with any skill until the trade deadline was the 2nd biggest factor.  Giroux's line struggled the entire year at 5 on 5 keeping the puck in the offensive zone as Jake struggles with making a tape to tape pass in transition. They rarely initiated a set play from behind the net.  I have to also fault the struggles of Ghost putting the puck on net most of the season for the 5 on 5 play.   The idea to use Streit, Ghost, and Gudas as shot generators on the top 3 lines wasn't a horrible decision by Hakstol, but they needed more diversity in the game plan.

Fair points about the forwards, but why the apparent failure to use other tactics in addition?  Perhaps I should have stated my query like this: I don't understand why Hakstol relied so heavily on the d-men last year given the defensive corps they had in place, without employing other strategies.  They still have some skilled forwards (arguably more skilled than the d-men).  Is that a system thing, or was it the players?

[murraycraven]

4 minutes ago, vis said:

Fair points about the forwards, but why the apparent failure to use other tactics in addition?  Perhaps I should have stated my query like this: I don't understand why Hakstol relied so heavily on the d-men last year given the defensive corps they had in place, without employing other strategies.  They still have some skilled forwards (arguably more skilled than the d-men).  Is that a system thing, or was it the players?

 

great question vis - and I am not sure of the answer.   They fact remains that Hak is still a Noob in the NHL.   We all thought we had something great going when he first came in but the league caught up to him.  He needs to be better in just about every situation this year just like the players.   I think at some point the players lost confidence and Hak lost confidence in them.

 

I am not sold on Hak as the long term Coach and I hope this year he proves me wrong.  Hopefully, he brings more than Berube this year....

[vis]

28 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

 

As a hockey player who has played both forward and D, I find this statement to not ring true. Who cares if it's the D that are doing the scoring? So two one things:

 

1. Shots from point are neither inherently bad or good, they're entirely neutral. The only thing that matters is whether you can a) get a shot through to the net, and b) there is something to either block the goalies view or change the direction or both.  In the absence of those two things,  it's quite possibly a giveaway and should be recorded that way  instead of as a useless shot.

 

In reality of course, there's not a lot of time to make decisions back there or wait for a screen or whatever, and so it becomes about retaining possession, no?

 

Low-to-High. Good grief.

 

I don't care who is doing the scoring, as long as someone is actually scoring.  The team didn't score much last year and it's not like their defense corps were all that skilled.  So, my question becomes: did it really make sense to keep running the offense through the defense given the lack of scoring and the personnel they had on the defense.  As I mentioned to HF above, I should have said: I don't understand why Hakstol relied so heavily on the d-men last year given the defensive corps they had in place, without employing other strategies.

 

I agree that shots from the point aren't necessarily bad.  But they have do more to get quality chances.

 

 

[Podein25]

2 minutes ago, vis said:

But they have to do more to get quality chances.

 

Agreed. Carry on. 

[vis]

4 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

great question vis - and I am not sure of the answer.   They fact remains that Hak is still a Noob in the NHL.   We all thought we had something great going when he first came in but the league caught up to him.  He needs to be better in just about every situation this year just like the players.   I think at some point the players lost confidence and Hak lost confidence in them.

 

I am not sold on Hak as the long term Coach and I hope this year he proves me wrong.  Hopefully, he brings more than Berube this year....

I am not either.  This is a big year for him, imo, though I doubt he's on the chopping block.  

 

I do wonder how the players feel about Hakstol.  Again, I come back to Ghost's quote at the end of the year.  It also seemed like players were supportive of Ghost playing his style.  I think Voracek made some comments to that effect.

[murraycraven]

1 minute ago, vis said:

I am not either.  This is a big year for him, imo, though I doubt he's on the chopping block.  

 

I do wonder how the players feel about Hakstol.  Again, I come back to Ghost's quote at the end of the year.  It also seemed like players were supportive of Ghost playing his style.  I think Voracek made some comments to that effect.

 

I agree with everything you stated...   Hak will have his share of growing pains but I still not sure about him.  His decision making last year was mind-boggling at times.   I am still waiting for him to hire VDV as a PP specialist.

[OccamsRazor]

10 minutes ago, vis said:

 I don't understand why Hakstol relied so heavily on the d-men last year given the defensive corps they had in place, without employing other strategies.

 

 

Because it is what his system is predicated upon doing to properly execute the system. 

 

It is what he did at ND and his Dmen did really well....is the Dmen to help with puck support and help get the puck up ice and then once they are in the zone the Dmen must know how to cycle the puck and when to pinch to keep it in.

 

And this is what we saw the defense struggle to do for 2 reasons they mentally couldn't process the play in front of them and the Dmen timed their pinches poorly and when they did most time their partner couldn't recognize this and did fall back and prepare when the pinch went bad.

 

This combined with the fact the forwards also must recognize when the D men are pinching and it is crucial for the to rotate and cover said Dmen in the cycle back check coverage.

 

For lack of a better term the communication/recognition just wasn't there because there just were many in the lineup who couldn't think fast and react accordingly....anis included the Captain as well....in fact it starts with him.

 

So i'm hoping with this being the 3rd year this team understand more of what they have to do and this whole group can execute and operator move like a machine a with less thinking...and more muscle memory to just instinctively do what is right.

 

And more skill and better mobility from Morin and Hagg will go a long way.

 

And their will still be hiccups though.....which should level out a lot by mid season. Fingers crossed.

[vis]

14 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

Because it is what his system is predicated upon doing to properly execute the system. 

 

Not disagreeing that there weren't execution problems.  But a few questions/thoughts:

 

-- Should a coach adjust to his personnel or when the coach's preferred system isn't apparently working that well?  I suppose this comes down to whether one feels it's entirely an execution issue or not.

 

-- If the players aren't executing, to what extent is that on the coach to get them to do so?  I guess you cannot coach skill, but does a coach bear responsibility for poor execution?

 

-- I hope that with more skill up front you will see more of the high-percentage plays around the net, rather than working for low-quality shots from the point.  Based on the article, and from what I observed, this team was really deficient in generating shots down low.  If that was the result of the coach's philosophy, then I really question Hakstol's system.

 

As mentioned in my initial post, maybe Hakstol is just laying the groundwork for when the younger, more skilled d-men and forwards are playing in the NHL.  And maybe the team will continue to learn how to execute.  However, it was his second season with the team last year.  Third time better be a charm.

[Podein25]

12 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

It is what he did at ND and his Dmen did really well....is the Dmen to help with puck support and help get the puck up ice and then once they are in the zone the Dmen must know how to cycle the puck and when to pinch to keep it in.

Isn't that just called (good) hockey.. 

 

13 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

Dmen timed their pinches poorly and when they did most time their partner couldn't recognize this and did fall back and prepare when the pinch went bad.

...as opposed to this, which is lousy hockey?

[OccamsRazor]

2 minutes ago, vis said:

Should a coach adjust to his personnel or when the coach's preferred system isn't apparently working that well?

 

 

I can't say did or didn't but it seemed on the surface he did. But i can't say for sure.

 

3 minutes ago, vis said:

If the players aren't executing, to what extent is that on the coach to get them to do so?

 

Good question i'm not sure either but my thinking is just that maybe he was sticking to it hoping they would come around and to show he has faith in them.

 

I really think the addition of two of two mobile yet very physical Dmen (Hagg and Morin) will help a lot to be able to take away time and space then to help a lot with the crisp quick pass up the ice out the D zone to the forwards to help with the transition game will go a long ways.

[OccamsRazor]

5 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

Isn't that just called (good) hockey.. 

 

...as opposed to this, which is lousy hockey?

 

I guess regardless of the system the players will need to execute it properly. And they didn't as a whole....from top to bottom or they did at times but the consistency is the issue.

[vis]

2 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

I can't say did or didn't but it seemed on the surface he did. But i can't say for sure.

I can't remember exactly when (perhaps after the 10-game streak), but I recall there being an adjustment to tighten things up defensively.  I wonder if, as part of that, Hakstol focused the team's o-zone play away from the "home-plate" and "behind-the-net" strategies.  My sense is that those types of plays are more likely to generate turnovers which could lead to a rush against the defense.  Again, maybe with a more capable defense (and more skilled offense) the team will be more comfortable being creative - perhaps aggressive - in the o-zone.  Here's hoping for something to improve in the o-zone, because they can't be that bad 5v5 again.

[Off the Pipe]

This was a great read, and it goes to show how much a physical LW was to helping this team score with the likes of Hartnell. I applauded the trade for the cap space we have saved recently, but hoped at that time someone would have stepped up and took Hartsy's role properly. That is what Schenn was supposed to do.

 

I believe/hope Lindblom can do this for G and Jake. Oscar may not be a great creator of plays, but he has a decent shot and has no problem finding/fighting for the open areas in front of the net. This should create more Home Plate opportunities.

• Jordan Weal seemed to do this toward the last part of the season last year, and he could continue to do it this year for the first line. Not saying Weal is physically imposing, just he seemed to find the open areas, or the puck in the right situations.

I think a line with Patrick, Konecny and Simmer could be entertaining to watch. Simmer setting up office in front of the net, Konecny creating open lanes with his shiftiness, and Patrick helping dig the puck behind the net or off the boards. Patrick and Konecny could be the best play makers Simmer may play with consistently in all his years here as a Flyers. 40 Goals for Simmer? May just be a dream...

 

I do believe/hope we will see more Home-Plate and Behind-the-Net scoring opportunities this season.

 

The Flyers have lacked the selfish shot taker since Carter, Mr. Playoffs and Hartsy left. They need that type of player here and hopefully one or two of these youngbucks can be that for this team's future.
 

What about a "Kid" line of Patrik, Konecny and Linblom(though he's 23?), like Murphy, Graves and Gelinas back in 1990?

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

On 9/6/2017 at 8:05 AM, hf101 said:

 

The lack of size and strength down the middle of the first line is one reason Hakstol relied on shots from the point and the fact that we didn't really have a #2 center who passed the puck with any skill until the trade deadline was the 2nd biggest factor.  Giroux's line struggled the entire year at 5 on 5 keeping the puck in the offensive zone as Jake struggles with making a tape to tape pass in transition. They rarely initiated a set play from behind the net.  I have to also fault the struggles of Ghost putting the puck on net most of the season for the 5 on 5 play.   The idea to use Streit, Ghost, and Gudas as shot generators on the top 3 lines wasn't a horrible decision by Hakstol, but they needed more diversity in the game plan.

 

I don't buy the lack of size down the middle argument. There are plenty of teams in the league that have had success without having size down the middle. To me, it comes down to talent and coaching/system. You either have the players to fit the system a coach wants to run or the coach comes up with a system to compliment the players he has. That was the problem in Philadelphia. The defense sucked, so Hakstol couldn't run a system in which the defense couldn't activate the offense. The offense was just a mess defensively, so they couldn't cover when the defense had a breakdown. The defense should be much improved with Morin and Hagg in the fold. As for the forwards, I'm hopeful that Knoblauch can help there because God knows Gord Murphy doesn't know **** about defense.