Home Page
 OTG

Search | Statistics | User Listing Forums | Albums | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2
Moderators: Moderators

Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 5
Now viewing page 5 [35 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Rangers -> Winter Is ComingMessage format
 
Rranger
Posted 2017-12-17 7:41 AM (#690588 - in reply to #690581)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2



All-Star

Posts: 4211
1000
LeetchyMrRanger - 2017-12-16 6:03 PM

I looked @ that Grabner goal a few times, does it look calculated to any one else? It looks like something he did on purpose. May be something he practices & tried it?






No it does not. Looks more like shut house luck.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
sureshore
Posted 2017-12-17 9:40 AM (#690591 - in reply to #690519)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2


All-Star

Posts: 1192
1000
PV29 - 2017-12-16 7:07 PM

How do you leave Marchand all alone like that? AV defensive system. That's how.

#FireAV


much as I'd like to say that was AVs system, that's typical Staal following the skater all the way across the ice
Top of the page Bottom of the page
sureshore
Posted 2017-12-17 9:44 AM (#690592 - in reply to #690565)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2


All-Star

Posts: 1192
1000
how could one not notice
Pierre_Pdare - 2017-12-16 7:42 PM

Did anyone notice the rack behind the bench (*)(*)
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2017-12-17 10:19 AM (#690593 - in reply to #690591)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2



All-Star

Posts: 4211
1000
sureshore - 2017-12-17 8:40 AM

PV29 - 2017-12-16 7:07 PM

How do you leave Marchand all alone like that? AV defensive system. That's how.

#FireAV


much as I'd like to say that was AVs system, that's typical Staal following the skater all the way across the ice





I agree with PV on this one. Rangers collapse around the puck carrier, in a box in short handed and even strength situations. And have forever under chewy. Many back door pp goals have been scored on the Rangers this season, but they bravely forge on with the dumbness. I guess chewy has never heard of keeping a man in front no matter what and attack the puck carrier with triangulation. I don't get not identifying a problem and dealing with it.

Edited by Rranger 2017-12-18 6:41 AM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
LeetchyMrRanger
Posted 2017-12-17 6:56 PM (#690596 - in reply to #690447)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2


All-Star

Posts: 1559
1000
Location: NJ
Ok, enough with that girl unless some one can post a pic.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2017-12-17 9:28 PM (#690600 - in reply to #690596)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2



All-Star

Posts: 4211
1000
LeetchyMrRanger - 2017-12-17 5:56 PM

Ok, enough with that girl unless some one can post a pic.




Check the highlights you might get a glimpse of her and her guns behind the rangers bench.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mjolnir
Posted 2017-12-18 7:56 AM (#690604 - in reply to #690600)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2



Legend

Posts: 15749
10000
Rranger - 2017-12-17 11:28 PM

LeetchyMrRanger - 2017-12-17 5:56 PM

Ok, enough with that girl unless some one can post a pic.




Check the highlights you might get a glimpse of her and her guns behind the rangers bench.


Figures -- nothing but a bunch of lust buckets hanging out here.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
concust
Posted 2017-12-19 3:51 PM (#690636 - in reply to #690593)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2



Legend

Posts: 14925
10000
Location: USA
Rranger - 2017-12-17 11:19 AM

sureshore - 2017-12-17 8:40 AM

PV29 - 2017-12-16 7:07 PM

How do you leave Marchand all alone like that? AV defensive system. That's how.

#FireAV


much as I'd like to say that was AVs system, that's typical Staal following the skater all the way across the ice





I agree with PV on this one. Rangers collapse around the puck carrier, in a box in short handed and even strength situations. And have forever under chewy. Many back door pp goals have been scored on the Rangers this season, but they bravely forge on with the dumbness. I guess chewy has never heard of keeping a man in front no matter what and attack the puck carrier with triangulation. I don't get not identifying a problem and dealing with it.


It happens every game, two players drop low and leave someone open out front. It's part of the backcheck system they employ.

I'll tell you the reasoning behind this system, although I wlll say up front that my opinion is that it's a generally poor system for most game situations.

In short, the point of dropping two guys to pressure the puck carrier, is to cause a turnover and for the other guy to be in a position to regain puck possession immediately. This is very hard to do one on one, in part because forwards these days are incredibly talented, and the rules are especially strict regarding clutching, grabbing, etc. So by sending one guy, the best you can do is hope that you can contain him to the outside, or he makes a low percentage pass.

Sending two is a much more aggressive play, it cuts down significantly on the forward's skate and pass options, and you recover the puck quickly and can transition quickly, which is the basis for the Rangers' game plan. Catch the opposing defensemen out of position/flat footed, and you can create a scoring opportunity. In order to do this you must be able to take the puck away and start the transition immediately - in the NHL giving a defenseman two strides (about a second) means he can get back in a much better defensive position and your advantage is gone. That's all it takes, so you want to use that second advantage.

The problem is it's a high risk, low reward system, especially for 5v5 and close game situations. If you're down one goal late, then sure, do it. You're going to lose otherwise. And usually if you have an aggressive backcheck like that it's incumbent on another forward to drop back and help out. The downside to this is, you have one fewer forward to outlet to in a transition game. Every decision has a cost. Every additional player you give more defensive responsibility to, is one less effective forward player in a rush.

The Rangers/AV probably chose this system because they are trying to build the team on speed and possession, which in today's NHL, is the right decision. Also, they have Lundqvist who bails them out of this system more often than he should. So they may have just said let's have a more aggressive backcheck and hopefully we can spring Kreider/Grabner/Nash and get more odd man rushes the other way. Sometimes it works. Other times it looks like a complete breakdown.

It's not an inherently bad system, but it should be employed in very game specific situations, and I also don't think the Rangers have great personnel to execute this as a full time, 5v5 system. And like I said, when they mess it up, it looks terrible. But the next time the Rangers score a goal off the rush, rewind about 3 or 4 passes and see if you notice if an aggressive backcheck led the the zone exit and the rush. It's very much a live by the sword, die by the sword system.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mjolnir
Posted 2017-12-19 5:05 PM (#690637 - in reply to #690636)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2



Legend

Posts: 15749
10000
concust - 2017-12-19 5:51 PM

Rranger - 2017-12-17 11:19 AM

sureshore - 2017-12-17 8:40 AM

PV29 - 2017-12-16 7:07 PM

How do you leave Marchand all alone like that? AV defensive system. That's how.

#FireAV


much as I'd like to say that was AVs system, that's typical Staal following the skater all the way across the ice





I agree with PV on this one. Rangers collapse around the puck carrier, in a box in short handed and even strength situations. And have forever under chewy. Many back door pp goals have been scored on the Rangers this season, but they bravely forge on with the dumbness. I guess chewy has never heard of keeping a man in front no matter what and attack the puck carrier with triangulation. I don't get not identifying a problem and dealing with it.


It happens every game, two players drop low and leave someone open out front. It's part of the backcheck system they employ.

I'll tell you the reasoning behind this system, although I wlll say up front that my opinion is that it's a generally poor system for most game situations.

In short, the point of dropping two guys to pressure the puck carrier, is to cause a turnover and for the other guy to be in a position to regain puck possession immediately. This is very hard to do one on one, in part because forwards these days are incredibly talented, and the rules are especially strict regarding clutching, grabbing, etc. So by sending one guy, the best you can do is hope that you can contain him to the outside, or he makes a low percentage pass.

Sending two is a much more aggressive play, it cuts down significantly on the forward's skate and pass options, and you recover the puck quickly and can transition quickly, which is the basis for the Rangers' game plan. Catch the opposing defensemen out of position/flat footed, and you can create a scoring opportunity. In order to do this you must be able to take the puck away and start the transition immediately - in the NHL giving a defenseman two strides (about a second) means he can get back in a much better defensive position and your advantage is gone. That's all it takes, so you want to use that second advantage.

The problem is it's a high risk, low reward system, especially for 5v5 and close game situations. If you're down one goal late, then sure, do it. You're going to lose otherwise. And usually if you have an aggressive backcheck like that it's incumbent on another forward to drop back and help out. The downside to this is, you have one fewer forward to outlet to in a transition game. Every decision has a cost. Every additional player you give more defensive responsibility to, is one less effective forward player in a rush.

The Rangers/AV probably chose this system because they are trying to build the team on speed and possession, which in today's NHL, is the right decision. Also, they have Lundqvist who bails them out of this system more often than he should. So they may have just said let's have a more aggressive backcheck and hopefully we can spring Kreider/Grabner/Nash and get more odd man rushes the other way. Sometimes it works. Other times it looks like a complete breakdown.

It's not an inherently bad system, but it should be employed in very game specific situations, and I also don't think the Rangers have great personnel to execute this as a full time, 5v5 system. And like I said, when they mess it up, it looks terrible. But the next time the Rangers score a goal off the rush, rewind about 3 or 4 passes and see if you notice if an aggressive backcheck led the the zone exit and the rush. It's very much a live by the sword, die by the sword system.


A friend described it as the "swarm the puck carrier" system.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2017-12-21 9:50 AM (#690756 - in reply to #690636)
Subject: Re: Game 33: New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins 12/16/17 - 5pm - MSG2



All-Star

Posts: 4211
1000
concust - 2017-12-19 2:51 PM

Rranger - 2017-12-17 11:19 AM

sureshore - 2017-12-17 8:40 AM

PV29 - 2017-12-16 7:07 PM

How do you leave Marchand all alone like that? AV defensive system. That's how.

#FireAV


much as I'd like to say that was AVs system, that's typical Staal following the skater all the way across the ice





I agree with PV on this one. Rangers collapse around the puck carrier, in a box in short handed and even strength situations. And have forever under chewy. Many back door pp goals have been scored on the Rangers this season, but they bravely forge on with the dumbness. I guess chewy has never heard of keeping a man in front no matter what and attack the puck carrier with triangulation. I don't get not identifying a problem and dealing with it.


It happens every game, two players drop low and leave someone open out front. It's part of the backcheck system they employ.

I'll tell you the reasoning behind this system, although I wlll say up front that my opinion is that it's a generally poor system for most game situations.

In short, the point of dropping two guys to pressure the puck carrier, is to cause a turnover and for the other guy to be in a position to regain puck possession immediately. This is very hard to do one on one, in part because forwards these days are incredibly talented, and the rules are especially strict regarding clutching, grabbing, etc. So by sending one guy, the best you can do is hope that you can contain him to the outside, or he makes a low percentage pass.

Sending two is a much more aggressive play, it cuts down significantly on the forward's skate and pass options, and you recover the puck quickly and can transition quickly, which is the basis for the Rangers' game plan. Catch the opposing defensemen out of position/flat footed, and you can create a scoring opportunity. In order to do this you must be able to take the puck away and start the transition immediately - in the NHL giving a defenseman two strides (about a second) means he can get back in a much better defensive position and your advantage is gone. That's all it takes, so you want to use that second advantage.

The problem is it's a high risk, low reward system, especially for 5v5 and close game situations. If you're down one goal late, then sure, do it. You're going to lose otherwise. And usually if you have an aggressive backcheck like that it's incumbent on another forward to drop back and help out. The downside to this is, you have one fewer forward to outlet to in a transition game. Every decision has a cost. Every additional player you give more defensive responsibility to, is one less effective forward player in a rush.

The Rangers/AV probably chose this system because they are trying to build the team on speed and possession, which in today's NHL, is the right decision. Also, they have Lundqvist who bails them out of this system more often than he should. So they may have just said let's have a more aggressive backcheck and hopefully we can spring Kreider/Grabner/Nash and get more odd man rushes the other way. Sometimes it works. Other times it looks like a complete breakdown.

It's not an inherently bad system, but it should be employed in very game specific situations, and I also don't think the Rangers have great personnel to execute this as a full time, 5v5 system. And like I said, when they mess it up, it looks terrible. But the next time the Rangers score a goal off the rush, rewind about 3 or 4 passes and see if you notice if an aggressive backcheck led the the zone exit and the rush. It's very much a live by the sword, die by the sword system.





Two defensemen going behind their net to retrieve a puck from one opposing forward and chipping it to one of three forwards standing around the front of their net, is not the beginning of a quick break. You’re dreaming if you think that's chewy’s goal at that point in time. His only goal is to get possession of the puck, chip it to one of the three telephone posts standing still in front of the net and have them carry the puck up the center of the zone or clear the puck out of the zone. Clearing the puck is usually what happens.
Do you really think chewy believes opposing coaches and forwards are so dumb, that they don't send one forward to crash the crease and tie up at least one of the Ranger forwards defending the front of the net and eliminating the ranger forward from any quick break in the event of a turnover, plus the opposing forward becomes a outlet for the one opposing forward behind the net who might beat these two Ranger defenseman you speak of, who both so willingly leave the front of their net to initiate a puck retrieval, all the while Chewys dreaming the Rangers are going to initiate a quick break. To complicate the issue ranger forwards do a ****ty job of covering the front of the net.
Again the opposing coach is not a stupid man he still has a high guy to help the opposing defense in case of a Ranger transition. Net result Rangers have a two on three. Sheer genius on chewys part and no he's not that dumb, because his goal is to get the puck out of the zone. Its puck retrieval and clear the zone when two Ranger defensemen go behind the net.
You can rewind the tape all you want watching for your scenario, that’s pee wee hockey stuff. It happens once in a blue moon. What happens more and we have all seen it is the puck chipped in front of the Rangers net by a defenseman and mayhem happening while a Ranger forward tries to control the puck and initiate the get the puck out of here scramble. . Rewind the tape and you will find retaliatory quick strikes by the Rangers are initiated by turnovers created before the puck gets anywhere near the Rangers goal line.
Your theory of chewys objectives of a successful puck retrieval and resulting transition with manpower advantage and subsequent goals make him and opposing coaches look very dumb.




Edited by Rranger 2017-12-21 5:23 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 5
Now viewing page 5 [35 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete all cookies set by this site)
Running MegaBBS ASP Forum Software
© 2002-2018 PD9 Software