I believe that Claude's philosophy in today's NHL is fundamentally flawed. It works well, but at its best all it did was defeat the worst team to make it to the NHL finals in years. We exposed Vancouver for what they were, a soft paper tiger, and even then it took 7 games to do it. Not to mention a goaltending performance that set mutiple NHL P.O records. We keep looking for the 2.0 version of that moment in time and I think it's impossible to replicate it given today's game.
His philosphy about the game is uninspiring, noncreative, and drains players of the offensive instincts they've honed since childhood. Tory Krug, although asked to take a role he isn't suited for went a 50 game stretch without a goal. A drop off was to be expected in Tory's game, but not to this extent. Meanwhile Riley Smith scores 25 (with 25 helpers) and has 5 pts. already the POs. While every situation isn't black and white, the extreme of those two situations sort of illustrate the effect Claude and his philosophy has on many players. The kid we thought was sharp eyed semi-sniper goes cold as ice, while the player who look as if he was inept around the net goes gang busters on another team. Marchand is an anomaly statistically under Claude. For the most part the Krug/Riley sliding scale is happening to some extent for players.
I understand the concept, it's not that it isn't valid. It reminds me of the
"machine" quote by Barnes in Platoon . It's a question of how successful it is in today's POs. I can see the allure of it to GMs too. No need to fuss over young talent, no need to weigh the payroll down with a marquee scorer. But over time the exit of talent (no matter how undisciplined) takes it toll. The league is literally running out of Claude like players. Ones that can comply with his demands and still retain a creative offensive instinct.
Felger sees it, he just can't express it with anything other than hyperbole in order to get ratings. A lot of us have been seeing it for years and have been ringing the warning bell. How many flags have to go up before others see it? I could care less in regular season and what his rope-a-dope, up the boards, dump and chase system does. It's what happens to it when faced with teams playing desperately and on a fine edge of risk vs. reward. It and he rarely have an answer for that type of play. They get stuck in Claude Mode, and when the opportunity arises to make a team pay for taking risk, they don't see it, or worse they see and don't react. When they do react they're so out of sorts they can't connect on oddman rushes. Sure we were 5th in scoring this year, but don't you think a team with that stat could come up with a handful of goals to make the POs? Not once but twice now we've been unable to generate the offense (against bad teams no less) to make the POs. Just as timely saves are nearly as important as save %, so are timely goals.
He's far too mechanical in his approach to the game, and it's been showing in the final games of these last two seasons. Teams come in either wanting to be the spoilers or vying for a P.O spot themselves and the boys can't rise to the occasion. IMO I think it's because there is no extra level with Claude. While there's varying degrees of how vigorously the system is executed, the boys feel like they are playing outside the system if they raise it to another level of desperation. They do it occasionally but it's fleeting, and rarely for an entire game.
In order for his style of hockey to be successful it has to be a ploddingly repetitive series of shifts and games. I believe it wears on players over time and eventually they go through the motions mindlessly (even with vigor), then when the opportunities arise to capitalize on situations (even ones created by the system) they're stuck in that mode. Then there's those who simply can't stay up with the grind. The reward of playing in such a manner isn't personally satisfying enough. Hell, it's not fun to play and it's certainly not fun to watch for the most part either.
It works, it's predictable, it's consistent, and it's overachieving often times regardless of the roster. The problem is in the higher echelons of the game all those things make it defeatable. While Claude's philosophies about the game used to be called "playoff style hockey", that isn't the case anymore. One look at what's going on in the POs now (by successful teams) and there's no doubt in my mind that ship sailed. Cardinal sins on this team are committed practically left and right by P.O teams (good and bad) in an effort to generate offensive, shake things up, or just feel like an individual player trying to make a difference. Good, bad, indifferent, this is the variety of play that's needed to win in today's NHL. Yes it has to be tempered with Claude like attributes, but not nearly as much, and that aspect of the game is fading each season.
All coaches try to cut down on bad turnovers, gaffs, and other such play. But other coaches do it with offensive chances as a barometer . The difference is Claude's philosophy is to eliminate them entirely at nearly any cost.
Can he come to understand the other half of the equation in today's game? It's yet to be seen IMO. We had an uptick in goals this year (historically on average under Claude it was high but nothing outrageous), while the "D" suffered mightily and that shows me he's not entirely oblivious to it. I think he "gets it", I just don't know if he has the mind set to act upon it. Old dogs, and the such. Perhaps this year was the front end of the equation, and adding his backend will be the needed adjustment. But I just don't see it,
I get the awful feeling that the much needed improvement on the "D" will only make Claude retreat back to his comfort zone. Yeah we'll probably make the POs with this improvement, but with a nonetheless flawed game plan for them (the POs).
I wouldn't go so far as to say Claude's overrated, but he has certainly IMO, overachieved . But an overachieving gameplan is destined to fail when confronted by a winning one that's underachieving.
Have a good summer everyone.
