Alex Galchenyuk Thread 7.0 - "Turns Rust To Gold?" Edition

[Account Terminated]

No surprise there. CBA discussions are going nowhere and the tournament will end before that. Even if an agreement was made, Galchenyuk will finish the year in Sarnia.

 

[vipergtx18*]

Who needs a black stallion when the habs have a black GALLION

 

[DAChampion]

Bowman just asked Stevie to back check once in a while, like he used to ask the Flower to do, with mixed results.

Otherwise Bowman shut his mouth and let his players play the game. Especially his offensive players. That's why he was the best coach ever.

And: Wait! I remember seeing Gretz live, at the coliseum, hanging out at the RED LINE waiting for the deadly stretch pass, with the rest of his team in his own end. While the Oil were killing a penalty.

And then I would watch the opposing D back out of the O zone, on the PP, every time, worrying about Gretz at the red line. 'Oh well, we'll score later, better worry about Gretz for now.' Oh. We lost. Oh well.

Man, Gretz should have been more responsible defensively.

Hockey is about scoring goals, it's about offense, and out skating your opponent. Always has been, always will be. Pure and simple. D is for weak teams without scorers. We just forgot that the last 20 years.

And if you're tempted, don't bring up 70's Habs. That was Dryden and Serge Savard on D, and 18 other guys who played all out offense, and hitting in the O zone, all the time, including Gainey.

Part of the reason Montreal implemented a defensive system is that we lack high-end offensive talent.

That will now change.

 

[Et le But]

Part of the reason Montreal implemented a defensive system is that we lack high-end offensive talent.

That will now change.

One great offensive player isn't enough to run and gun, unless the plan is to get more lotto picks for more great offensive players.

The last few cup winners all ran defensive systems.

 

[pine*]

One great offensive player isn't enough to run and gun, unless the plan is to get more lotto picks for more great offensive players.

One of MacKinnon, Drouin, Barkov, Lindholm would be lovely.

 

[That]

As the WJC starts and the OHL has reached it's halfway point, I think it's time to post this: https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=18mgUAdNqG7o8lAzph4hBwOImgTeLyJL2stYZMxvY-VA

It's all of the Galchenyuk game reports I've done to date. It has boxscores, highlights, line mates, takeaways, giveaways and grades. I'm still trying to find a way to catch that one elusive Sault Ste Marie game that he scored 4 points in. I'll probably just buy an OHL live pass and see if it's there. It shows Galchenyuk's progression this year (as well as my writing). I think his slow start could be contributed to three factors. Coming back from injury, having more attention on him than he previously had been used too, and confidence. His skating is literally night and day since the beginning of the year. He's fast, incredibly balance, and deceptive. He can play the game at any speed. At the start of the year he looked sluggish and occasionally uncomfortable, he tended to struggled with changing the pace of the game.

The "Grade" scale is 1-10. 1 being absolutely terrible. Turnovers consistently, no effort defensively, and absolutely zero scoring chances. 10 being domination shift and after shift in all three zones.

The breakdown of games is:

4 - 2
5 - 4
5.5 - 2
6 - 3
6.5 - 1
7 - 1
7.5 - 6
7.75 - 1
8 - 4
8.25 - 1
8.5 - 2
9 - 3
9.25 - 1
9.5 - 1

His most common rating is obviously 7.5. Which is pretty good. His average rating is 7.1/10, lower than expected, but with his slow starts and some god awful games it certainly does bring it down a bit. If we take away his first 5 games, his average rating becomes 7.4/10. I noticed that he hasn't had more than 5 games (3 separate streaks) where he's been 7/10 or above. After that mark he tends to have a rough game. Not that any of this means much (as I'm not really a stat guy), but it's an okay indicator of his consistency.

If any notices any spelling mistakes, mismatched highlights and boxscores, or has some of the missing highlights, please let me know.

 

[Zeroknowledge*]

As the WJC starts and the OHL has reached it's halfway point, I think it's time to post this: https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=18mgUAdNqG7o8lAzph4hBwOImgTeLyJL2stYZMxvY-VA

It's all of the Galchenyuk game reports I've done to date. It has boxscores, highlights, line mates, takeaways, giveaways and grades. I'm still trying to find a way to catch that one elusive Sault Ste Marie game that he scored 4 points in. I'll probably just buy an OHL live pass and see if it's there. It shows Galchenyuk's progression this year (as well as my writing). I think his slow start could be contributed to three factors. Coming back from injury, having more attention on him than he previously had been used too, and confidence. His skating is literally night and day since the beginning of the year. He's fast, incredibly balance, and deceptive. He can play the game at any speed. At the start of the year he looked sluggish and occasionally uncomfortable, he tended to struggled with changing the pace of the game.

The "Grade" scale is 1-10. 1 being absolutely terrible. Turnovers consistently, no effort defensively, and absolutely zero scoring chances. 10 being domination shift and after shift in all three zones.

The breakdown of games is:

4 - 2
5 - 4
5.5 - 2
6 - 3
6.5 - 1
7 - 1
7.5 - 6
7.75 - 1
8 - 4
8.25 - 1
8.5 - 2
9 - 3
9.25 - 1
9.5 - 1

His most common rating is obviously 7.5. Which is pretty good. His average rating is 7.1/10, lower than expected, but with his slow starts and some god awful games it certainly does bring it down a bit. If we take away his first 5 games, his average rating becomes 7.4/10. I noticed that he hasn't had more than 5 games (3 separate streaks) where he's been 7/10 or above. After that mark he tends to have a rough game. Not that any of this means much (as I'm not really a stat guy), but it's an okay indicator of his consistency.

If any notices any spelling mistakes, mismatched highlights and boxscores, or has some of the missing highlights, please let me know.

If one of the top 2,3 players in the OHL averages as a 7.5 then I'm guessing you regard most other players as 4s and 5s ???

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Bowman just asked Stevie to back check once in a while, like he used to ask the Flower to do, with mixed results.

Otherwise Bowman shut his mouth and let his players play the game. Especially his offensive players. That's why he was the best coach ever.

And: Wait! I remember seeing Gretz live, at the coliseum, hanging out at the RED LINE waiting for the deadly stretch pass, with the rest of his team in his own end. While the Oil were killing a penalty.

And then I would watch the opposing D back out of the O zone, on the PP, every time, worrying about Gretz at the red line. 'Oh well, we'll score later, better worry about Gretz for now.' Oh. We lost. Oh well.

Man, Gretz should have been more responsible defensively.

Hockey is about scoring goals, it's about offense, and out skating your opponent. Always has been, always will be. Pure and simple. D is for weak teams without scorers. We just forgot that the last 20 years.

And if you're tempted, don't bring up 70's Habs. That was Dryden and Serge Savard on D, and 18 other guys who played all out offense, and hitting in the O zone, all the time, including Gainey.

You couldn't be more wrong about both Yzerman and Bowman. Bowman is the creator of the left wing lock which is the initial form of the neutral zone trap. He demands that his centers are defensively strong which is what he did with both Lemaire and Yzerman.

It is nothing short of laughable when you say that Bowman just asked Yzerman to backcheck once in a while. Find me that quote..........lol

If you understand the tactical aspect of the game and Bowman's philosophy you would know that systems don't call for "once in a while" efforts. Systems require adherence and consistency......otherwise the system doesn't work. Pierre Larouche is an example of a player who didn't want to backcheck and he found himself consistently benched and eventually traded from Bowman's team. So much for him letting his skilled players play as Larouche had more skill on that team than anyone not named Lafleur, and even that is debatable.

As for the comment about Beliveau.............he was a great two way center, I am not sure what weak point you were trying to make. It is possible to put up big point totals while playing a complete game as players like Crosby, Francis, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Gilmour can attest to. It is crucial that your best offensive players are your best players in all three zones if you want win championships. If you don't believe me just ask Bowman and Yzerman as they have proven as much.

 

[That]

If one of the top 2,3 players in the OHL averages as a 7.5 then I'm guessing you regard most other players as 4s and 5s ???

I probably should have mentioned that. I would probably be more or less fairer to other players that I don't watch as much. When you watch a player, you expect a certain level of play. It's relative to Galchenyuk, not to other players. If I were to rate every player, the scale would be different, and Galchenyuk would probably have a larger average.

Like I said, I'm not really a stat guy, and I don't believe it means much at all. It's more of something to read.

Keep in mind, while he's a great player, he simply does not dominate every night. Which honestly, no player does.

 

[Et le But]

You couldn't be more wrong about both Yzerman and Bowman. Bowman is the creator of the left wing lock which is the initial form of the neutral zone trap. He demands that his centers are defensively strong which is what he did with both Lemaire and Yzerman.

It is nothing short of laughable when you say that Bowman just asked Yzerman to backcheck once in a while. Find me that quote..........lol

If you understand the tactical aspect of the game and Bowman's philosophy you would know that systems don't call for "once in a while" efforts. Systems require adherence and consistency......otherwise the system doesn't work. Pierre Larouche is an example of a player who didn't want to backcheck and he found himself consistently benched and eventually traded from Bowman's team. So much for him letting his skilled players play as Larouche had more skill on that team than anyone not named Lafleur, and even that is debatable.

As for the comment about Beliveau.............he was a great two way center, I am not sure what weak point you were trying to make. It is possible to put up big point totals while playing a complete game as players like Crosby, Francis, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Gilmour can attest to. It is crucial that your best offensive players are your best players in all three zones if you want win championships. If you don't believe me just ask Bowman and Yzerman as they have proven as much.

Obviously every player is different and there are a few - very few players Bowman knew not to expect much defensively from - Lafleur especially. But if you want Galchenyuk to play center, that's not going to be acceptable.

You can't always outscore the opposition. Just ask the Washington Capitals who couldn't even get passed Jacques Martin's Habs.

 

[DAChampion]

You can't always outscore the opposition. Just ask the Washington Capitals who couldn't even get passed Jacques Martin's Habs.

The exact example showing how overrated defensive systems are.

The Washington Capitals came first or second in the President's Trophy race that season. They then lost in the first round of that playoffs in a 7 game-series to the same team that eventually beat a similar Pittsburgh Penguins team.

Is that an argument against the 2010 Capitals system? No. That is because winning the cup means winning 4 playoff rounds, and thus good teams and great teams will often be eliminated in the playoffs, more often than not. Yes, the Habs beat Washington when Halak was able to have a .950 save percentage or so that is not typical for him. If you build a parallel reality machine and have the 2010 Habs play the 2010 Capitals 100 times, I'm confident that Washington would win most of those rounds.

I'll then note that those same 2010 Habs were completely dominated and pulverised by the 2010 Flyers, for a simple reason: an talent vacuum at the forward position. They didn't have a Kovalev-type player anymore. The same Flyers who dominated the Habs were then defeated by Patrick Kane, Jonathan Toews and the Chicago Blackhawks.

Washington was somehow then traumatized by the Habs system, and completely changed their coaching philosophy. They have been mediocre ever since. Mike Green has declined. Alexander Ovechkin has declined. They discarded Alexander Semin this summer.

We won't be able to put together an Ovechkin-Backstrom-Semin line anytime soon, unless we win the lottery. But, we'll be able to put together a legitimate 1st line and 2nd line.

A team's system should fit the players.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Obviously every player is different and there are a few - very few players Bowman knew not to expect much defensively from - Lafleur especially. But if you want Galchenyuk to play center, that's not going to be acceptable.

You can't always outscore the opposition. Just ask the Washington Capitals who couldn't even get passed Jacques Martin's Habs.

It is a fact that defence wins championships. Short of dynasties like the 80's Oilers, of which will never be seen again, it requires compromise from your top scorers to play for the greater good rather than their personal stat line. The Devils and Red Wings who are the most succesful teams over the last 15 years have built their teams on defensive systems which include total compliance from their most skilled players.

 

[Et le But]

The exact example showing how overrated defensive systems are.

The Washington Capitals came first or second in the President's Trophy race that season. They then lost in the first round of that playoffs in a 7 game-series to the same team that eventually beat a similar Pittsburgh Penguins team.

Is that an argument against the 2010 Capitals system? No. That is because winning the cup means winning 4 playoff rounds, and thus good teams and great teams will often be eliminated in the playoffs, more often than not. Yes, the Habs beat Washington when Halak was able to have a .950 save percentage or so that is not typical for him. If you build a parallel reality machine and have the 2010 Habs play the 2010 Capitals 100 times, I'm confident that Washington would win most of those rounds.

I'll then note that those same 2010 Habs were completely dominated and pulverised by the 2010 Flyers, for a simple reason: an talent vacuum at the forward position. They didn't have a Kovalev-type player anymore.

Washington was somehow then traumatized by the Habs system, and completely changed their coaching philosophy. They have been mediocre ever since. Mike Green has declined. Alexander Ovechkin has declined. They discarded Alexander Semin this summer.

We won't be able to put together an Ovechkin-Backstrom-Semin line anytime soon, unless we win the lottery. But, we'll be able to put together a legitimate 1st line and 2nd line.

A team's system should fit the players.

The thing is, defense and offense are far more intertwined than given credit for. So when people say defense wins championships, the point is you can't simply look to outscore your opponent.

Unless you are talking unprecedented offensive firepower, your players aren't "too good" to be held accountable defensively. We need Galchenyuk for offense, not defense, but unless he turns into a guy who regularly puts up 100+ points, it's fair to judge him somewhat on his defense.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

The thing is, defense and offense are far more intertwined than given credit for. So when people say defense wins championships, the point is you can't simply look to outscore your opponent.

Unless you are talking unprecedented offensive firepower, your players aren't "too good" to be held accountable defensively. We need Galchenyuk for offense, not defense, but unless he turns into a guy who regularly puts up 100+ points, it's fair to judge him somewhat on his defense.

Offensive numbers are much more relevant when you aren't creating similar offensive numbers for your opponent.

 

[DAChampion]

It is a fact that defence wins championships. Short of dynasties like the 80's Oilers, of which will never be seen again, it requires compromise from your top scorers to play for the greater good rather than their personal stat line. The Devils and Red Wings who are the most succesful teams over the last 15 years have built their teams on defensive systems which include total compliance from their most skilled players.

There is one way to win:

- Scoring more goals than the other team.
- Allowing fewer goals than the other team.

Both are exactly the same. Emphasizing that one zone is always important than the other is pure sloganist BS. Ultimately the system has to fit the players.

Detroit, Pittsburgh, Chicago have all recently won cups with great forwards.

The LA Kings also won a cup recently. People remember Jonathan Quick, and forget that the Kings regularly scored 3, 4, or 5 goals per game.

 

[DAChampion]

The thing is, defense and offense are far more intertwined than given credit for. So when people say defense wins championships, the point is you can't simply look to outscore your opponent.

Unless you are talking unprecedented offensive firepower, your players aren't "too good" to be held accountable defensively. We need Galchenyuk for offense, not defense, but unless he turns into a guy who regularly puts up 100+ points, it's fair to judge him somewhat on his defense.

I'm not against having Galchenyuk learn defense by any means, I'm just worried the Habs will start him off on the 3rd/4th line and ask him to learn shutdown first thing, like they did with Eller, Pacioretty, etc.

Put him in a position to succeed right away imo. The value added he can contribute is at forward, in the ozone. Let him learn defense later.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

There is one way to win:

- Scoring more goals than the other team.
- Allowing fewer goals than the other team.

Both are exactly the same. Emphasizing that one zone is always important than the other is pure sloganist BS. Ultimately the system has to fit the players.

Detroit, Pittsburgh, Chicago have all recently won cups with great forwards.

The LA Kings also won a cup recently. People remember Jonathan Quick, and forget that the Kings regularly scored 3, 4, or 5 goals per game.

The Kings were one of the lowest scoring teams in the NHL this season.......but who's counting. Detroit, Pit and Chicago's top forwards all bought into their defesive system. Which only further supports the fact that defence wins.

Were you around to watch the Habs win a Cup.......they won with defence.

We are dealing with an established fact and I am not interested in getting involved in your role as devil's advocate.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Not a single player on either the Kings or Devils averaged more than a point per game in the playoffs last season..........they were obviously eliminated early due to their lack of big time scorers

 

[NotProkofievian]

Obviously every player is different and there are a few - very few players Bowman knew not to expect much defensively from - Lafleur especially. But if you want Galchenyuk to play center, that's not going to be acceptable.

You can't always outscore the opposition. Just ask the Washington Capitals who couldn't even get passed Jacques Martin's Habs.

If you can't outscore your opposition you lose the game. There are two methods of doing this: increasing your total above your opponent's, or decreasing your opponent's total below yours. The problem with the habs over the last few years is that we've had to rely on strategy b exclusively. This is what Cammalleri was referring to with the infamous "losing mentality" comment. The idea that we can only win if we shell up and score a few lucky goals.

What I think you meant by "you can't always outscore your opponent," is that you can't always win a "shot for shot" battle with them. And that's true. However, unless you're capable of winning games like that, it's only a matter of time until a team cracks open your shell like Philly did only a few weeks after Jacques Martin's habs dispensed with the Washington Capitals.

You're right in that you won't be successful with a "run and gun" offensive style with just one offensive player. However, if we are to have any offense capable of winning games like the Philly 09-10 playoff games, it will be because Galchenyuk fulfilled his potential as an elite offensive threat, preferably at the center position. What I'm saying is that he needs to be encouraged to be creative at the next level. He can't be afraid to take chances to learn what will work, and what won't work. If he gets sat because one of his drop passes didn't work I'll be more than a little pissed.

 

[DAChampion]

The Kings were one of the lowest scoring teams in the NHL this season.......

They weren't even in the playoff picture until the Jeff Carter trade, which rebalanced their lineup and made them a dominant offensive team.

In the playoffs, it was consistent, high offense.

I think they scored 12 goals in 5 games against Vancouver, 15 goals in 4 games against St-Louis, 14 goals in 5 games against Phoenix, and 16 goals in 6 games against New Jersey.

That's 57 goals in 20 playoff games, an incredibly high rate 2.85 goals per game, much higher than the playoff average where scoring is usually much lower than in the regular season.

We are dealing with an established fact

"Defense first" is just a slogan.

Bottom line is both defense and offense are required.

 

[DAChampion]

Not a single player on either the Kings or Devils averaged more than a point per game in the playoffs last season..........they were obviously eliminated early due to their lack of big time scorers

Dustin Brown and Anze Kopitar both had 20 points in 20 playoff games.

That is a *very* high scoring pace for the playoffs, which are more competitive than the regular season. It's equivalent to maybe 30 points in 20 regular season games.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

They weren't even in the playoff picture until the Jeff Carter trade, which rebalanced their lineup and made them a dominant offensive team.

In the playoffs, it was consistent, high offense.

I think they scored 12 goals in 5 games against Vancouver, 15 goals in 4 games against St-Louis, 14 goals in 5 games against Phoenix, and 16 goals in 6 games against New Jersey.

That's 57 goals in 20 playoff games, an incredibly high rate 2.85 goals per game, much higher than the playoff average where scoring is usually much lower than in the regular season.


"Defense first" is just a slogan.

Bottom line is both defense and offense are required.

What you are failing to understand is that defence creates offence. It was the Kings finally buying into the defensive system that lead to their offensive increase. Carter was hardly an offensive force after the trade but the message to the team was much more powerful. Managements commitment to winning is what inspired the players to comply with the system.

2.85 GPG is hardly impressive especially when you count all of the empty netters that were scored due to the fact that they were winning close, defensive games.

Feel free to leave out their defensive stats lol..........where did they rank in that category

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Dustin Brown and Anze Kopitar both had 20 points in 20 playoff games.

That is a *very* high scoring pace for the playoffs, which are more competitive than the regular season. It's equivalent to maybe 30 points in 20 regular season games.

Where do Giroux's 17 points in 10 games fit into your equation? Did the flyers ride these offensive exploits to the finals?

 

[FlyingKostitsyn]

Its a strange debate you guys are having... Defense and offense are important, probably equally (which I think is somewhat DAChampion's point). What counts is getting puck possesion, keeping it and using it to score goals without getting scored on.

Relating to Galchenyuk - elite offensive forwards are more rare than elite defensive forwards so we need him to focus on offense as long as he's not a liability defensively. He needs to develop in the aspect that will allow him to be the most impactful for the team's success and that is by scoring goals and helping others score too.

What you are failing to understand is that defence creates offence.

Just like the best defense is keeping the puck in the opponents zone... Its also easier to defend a 3 goal lead than a 1 goal lead.

 

[PricePkPatch*]

Obviously every player is different and there are a few - very few players Bowman knew not to expect much defensively from - Lafleur especially. But if you want Galchenyuk to play center, that's not going to be acceptable.

You can't always outscore the opposition. Just ask the Washington Capitals who couldn't even get passed Jacques Martin's Habs.

Last time I checked, the Caps had the lead 3-1 once in this series. They came real close of eliminating us quickly. We did not crushed them down, we barely squeezed a series win.

Same with the Pens; we still only won this series in 7, and we never took the lead once.