I think its more that the m2m scheme they run pulls everyone all over the place in the dzone and due that we often don't have numbers back defending the house. Its easy to get to the front of the net when the team you are playing doesn't have bodies back defending. I think clearing the crease would be more effective with a box plus 1 scheme where you always have that box shielding your net and preventing players from getting in.
The game today the goal was on an isolated 1 on 1 battle where their player committed and infraction and got away with it.
I'm at the point now where we have seen a number of personnel changes and our defensive metrics still stink. I'm looking at the system now before I make any additional changes.
Agree absolutely. We now have big D, small and quick D, D who are happy to have pucks bounce off them all night long, at least 2 D who can play a transition game and at least 2 D with some snap and growl. Conclusion: it ain't the D.
What we still don't have is a D scheme that is built around the players we actually have, and too many costly breakdowns in the zone and on the way out, and we still have player-sized gaps regularly between the D and FW and too few passing options when the zone needs to be cleared.
Conclusion: it ain't the D personnel, although IMO Beaulieu should never play another game for the Jets. We don't need more crease-clearing D; we need to move abandon whatever this hybrid system is that still remains from The Mo Years, and we need to be much more quick and decisive in working those options. And we also need to train our incoming forwards to play defence when the play is beside and behind them, as well as when it's front of them. Too late for 55 et al, but not for the young 'uns, hopefully.
This game was there for the taking. Played well, had some lousy luck and reffing, but they need the clean 2 points and didn't get. Given the upcoming stretch I think these lost points over the Dallas games may turn out to be one of those pivots in which a season is won or lost.