Bruins X's & O's

[PIMsCup]

Hey folks,

I'd love to be able to harvest the hockey knowledge you all possess with regards to the X's and O's of the team. I was thinking that a thread dedicated to talk about on tangible on-ice tactics would be a good read, and help myself and others advance our hockey education.

Thoughts?

 

[Flannelman]

Very good idea; I know there are some coaches and former players here that are very smart

 

[PIMsCup]

Very good idea; I know there are some coaches and former players here that are very smart

That's who I hope could elevate our game, and ultimately broaden the conversation beyond point totals and intangibles.

 

[Fenway]

Sounds good to me

 

[Gee Wally]

Well......and here I thought it was going to be about kisses and hugs...




Xoxoxo

 

[smithformeragent]

I thought this was about Elle King.

 

[Strange Universe]

Well......and here I thought it was going to be about kisses and hugs...




Xoxoxo

I also thought your theory had a lot of stock to it.....

 

[PIMsCup]

I also thought your theory had a lot of stock to it.....

yikes.

*slow clap*

 

[Strange Universe]

yikes.

*slow clap*

No disrespect to you, it is a wonderful idea I just wanted to bring in a little laughter that is all.

 

[Mount Kramer Cameras]

 

[PIMsCup]

No disrespect to you, it is a wonderful idea I just wanted to bring in a little laughter that is all.

I was showing respect. It was a brilliant pun.

 

[Strange Universe]

I was showing respect. It was a brilliant pun.

Thank-you, I was not certain and did not want to come off as something else.
Thanks again.

 

[PIMsCup]

OK.

Can anyone explain our second powerplay unit? Obviously our 1st unit is loaded with talent and is very structured yet creative, but the 2nd unit just seems like chaos. Anyone got a read on that situation? Not that I'm complaining, our special teams are clicking,

 

[talkinaway]

OK.

Can anyone explain our second powerplay unit? Obviously our 1st unit is loaded with talent and is very structured yet creative, but the 2nd unit just seems like chaos. Anyone got a read on that situation? Not that I'm complaining, our special teams are clicking,

1) If the first unit does their job, the second unit doesn't get out there in the first place (second place?).

2) It's working. Really, really well. Pretty sure our PP% is greater than, or at least comparable to, our shootout %. Don't try to fix it.

3) From what I've heard, they usually do a 90:30 split between the first and second unit. It gets our elite players on the ice more with the man advantage. That puts more pressure on the non-PP players (and maybe the second unit) to pick up some 5v5 TOI slack. That seems to be working pretty well, and while Clode isn't going as gonzo with the "roll 4" as he was a few years ago, he's still keeping a pretty long bench, with the fourth line getting quite a bit of ice time.

 

[Mantis]

Rob Schneider is... A stapler

 

[Danton Heineken]

Wham blocks

 

[ap3lovr]

I'll kick it off with a discussion about the box+1.

Currently the box+1 is good at keeping the play to the outside, but the stationary nature of the up high forwards is a weakness in this system. It leads to us not clearing the zone and missing assignments against opposing players. I always wondered what a triangle+2 system would look like in comparison. I know it would open up the weak side, but I would think it would lead to clearing the zone more effectively. Just a thought.

 

[ap3lovr]

OK.

Can anyone explain our second powerplay unit? Obviously our 1st unit is loaded with talent and is very structured yet creative, but the 2nd unit just seems like chaos. Anyone got a read on that situation? Not that I'm complaining, our special teams are clicking,

The 2nd unit has been in a bit of flux. We've seen 4 different defenders on that unit and the wingers keep changing. As the season progresses that should fix itself. I would love to see some changes to the 2nd unit though. I think they are trying to emulate what the first unit does, and it doesn't play to their strengths.

Belesky & Hayes should go to the net and sit there, everyone else should have the goal of getting a low shot on net. Something that will create a rebound and create chaos. Fan out 3 wide and the top and cycle between them until you have a clear low shot into the front of the net. It might get a deflection, or the 2 big guys in front can jam it home for you.

 

[PIMsCup]

The 2nd unit has been in a bit of flux. We've seen 4 different defenders on that unit and the wingers keep changing. As the season progresses that should fix itself. I would love to see some changes to the 2nd unit though. I think they are trying to emulate what the first unit does, and it doesn't play to their strengths.

Belesky & Hayes should go to the net and sit there, everyone else should have the goal of getting a low shot on net. Something that will create a rebound and create chaos. Fan out 3 wide and the top and cycle between them until you have a clear low shot into the front of the net. It might get a deflection, or the 2 big guys in front can jam it home for you.

This instinct to attempt to recreate the 1st PP unit is what I'm seeing from the 2nd where, like you said, it's a mismatch between the strategy and the skill sets available. Do you envision the two-man net-front plan to be a balanced umbrella or orverloaded?

Sidebar:
I've noticed that it's usually Krecji who stays on the ice to transition into the 2nd unit.

Edit:

In other situations I've noticed that Ferarro and Belesky are amazing at single-handedly creating fore-checking possession during line changes. Is this luck, skill, or usage?

 

[Era of Sanity]

box + 1 puts a lot of responsibility on the c deep in the zone with the d often to pressure the puck. It is why Claude is so concerned about the defensive ability of his centers.

 

[Stevedave]

Currently the box+1 is good at keeping the play to the outside, but the stationary nature of the up high forwards is a weakness in this system. It leads to us not clearing the zone and missing assignments against opposing players. I always wondered what a triangle+2 system would look like in comparison. I know it would open up the weak side, but I would think it would lead to clearing the zone more effectively. Just a thought.

Just trying to understand what you mean. So the two wings would both play the one d-man with the puck? B/C if not I don't really see what the difference would be between a triangle+2 and a box+1.

Btw I always called it a box in one. But more often then not I hear it called a Box and one. I think they are sorta interchangeable but to me box in one is a more accurate description of what the concept of the defense.

 

[PIMsCup]

box + 1 puts a lot of responsibility on the c deep in the zone with the d often to pressure the puck. It is why Claude is so concerned about the defensive ability of his centers.

Do you think the centers are capable of handling that assignment?

 

[Caper Bruins fan]

It would be nice if someone could explain the actual specifics of Claude Julien's system and how it differs from other teams citing specific examples .

 

[Stevedave]

box + 1 puts a lot of responsibility on the c deep in the zone with the d often to pressure the puck. It is why Claude is so concerned about the defensive ability of his centers.

I think Claude's bigger concern with his centers is the role they play in his back check. I think a fair amount of teams play the box+1 but I don't see meany teams who have a back check like the B's. But I don't know.

 

[Stevedave]

box + 1 puts a lot of responsibility on the c deep in the zone with the d often to pressure the puck.

I think pretty much the guy closest to the puck, pressures the puck. The center pretty much is all ways has to play deep is the zone no matter the system. Could you explain further what you mean. I think we may have a different concept of the box+1.