Rumor: Ilya Kovalchuk will be signing a 2-3 year deal with NYR

[Fvital92]

The reason Ovy can always be open on the Caps PP from the same spot is because the rest of the power play is also a threat to score, which is what the Rangers need to do to open up that shot. If the only noticeable threat is the guy ready for that one timer then you can easily take it away. If you have to respect some of the other players then it gets a lot tougher

If I was defending the Caps PP I would just put a player on Ovi and take my chances defending 3 against 4. He is that good.

 

[Fitzy]

The reason Ovy can always be open on the Caps PP from the same spot is because the rest of the power play is also a threat to score, which is what the Rangers need to do to open up that shot. If the only noticeable threat is the guy ready for that one timer then you can easily take it away. If you have to respect some of the other players then it gets a lot tougher

True, and very few NYR players have shown to be a threat to score on the PP. Zibanejad doubled everyone else's total.

Kovalchuk should help with that. He averaged between 10-20 PPG a season in his prime.

 

[SA16]

I'm pretty sure the reason Ovy always is open to score on the PP is because teams are too afraid to try new things with defensive structure and instead of covering him they try to defend guys who have a far lesser chance of scoring.

Put a guy right on him the whole PP and don't let him get the puck. See what happens. How else can you know? You already know that just trying to defend the Caps with a regular system doesn't work.

 

[Synergy27]

I'm pretty sure the reason Ovy always is open to score on the PP is because teams are too afraid to try new things with defensive structure and instead of covering him they try to defend guys who have a far lesser chance of scoring.

Put a guy right on him the whole PP and don't let him get the puck. See what happens. How else can you know? You already know that just trying to defend the Caps with a regular system doesn't work.

You have a point about knowing that the current strategy doesn't really work, but I wouldn't feel confident that a shadow job on the PP would be successful either. 4 on 3 PPs are inherently more dangerous than 5 on 4. Every single NHL player, if left open, is a threat to score. Some things just can't be defended - that's the beauty of it.

 

[Hire Sather]

Some people in here are hilariously negative.

Are we rebuilding? Yeah
Are we the oilers of the last decade? Hell no.

It's not like we're starting from scratch with ZERO talent. There is a lot of good NHL talent on this team, people seem to forget that due to half the team being injured the whole damn season. Just because we're not bonafide contenders doesn't mean we need to be rebuilding from rock bottom and just be an AHL team for all of next year.

Sadly a lot of people have no pride and don't want to try and win games unless they believe we're a cup contender

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Sadly a lot of people have no pride and don't want to try and win games unless they believe we're a cup contender

Pride goeth...before a fall.



1940!!!

 

[SA16]

You have a point about knowing that the current strategy doesn't really work, but I wouldn't feel confident that a shadow job on the PP would be successful either. 4 on 3 PPs are inherently more dangerous than 5 on 4. Every single NHL player, if left open, is a threat to score. Some things just can't be defended - that's the beauty of it.

But it wouldn’t be the same as a regular 4 on 3 because you’d be cutting off the entire side of the ice Ovy is on. It would be in a much more limited area. You know doing normal things on defense there will lead them to scoring around 25% of the time why not see if this is better?

 

[Synergy27]

But it wouldn’t be the same as a regular 4 on 3 because you’d be cutting off the entire side of the ice Ovy is on. It would be in a much more limited area. You know doing normal things on defense there will lead them to scoring around 25% of the time why not see if this is better?

I wanted to put a direct disclaimer into my post stating that I know it's not the same as a regular 4 on 3, but I chose not to. I'm just saying that this isn't a novel idea and there are reasons why teams don't deploy it.

 

[SA16]

They don’t use it because they are too risky adverse and would rather lose doing something seeming normal than potentially lose doing something very different. This has changed a bit in baseball - take a look at the shift the dbacks used against DJ LeMahieu. There comes a point where if you know something doesn’t work maybe it’s time to see if you can do something better. Nobody knows if it’ll work because nobody has ever tried it long term.

 

[nyr2k2]

They don’t use it because they are too risky adverse and would rather lose doing something seeming normal than potentially lose doing something very different. This has changed a bit in baseball - take a look at the shift the dbacks used against DJ LeMahieu. There comes a point where if you know something doesn’t work maybe it’s time to see if you can do something better. Nobody knows if it’ll work because nobody has ever tried it long term.

Yes, it's about the risk aversion. Just like in the NFL how study after study after study shows that once you hit midfield (or some other field position) it is almost always the better option to go for it on fourth-and-one than to punt it away. But, coaches don't want to take the risk, because they know if they start trying different things and it doesn't work they'll be criticized.

Like what Gabe Kapler is trying to do--he's an idiot and does't really understand himself what he's actually trying to do, but I give the guy props for having the stones to go out there and try some different stuff. Professional sports is all about mimicry; teams will just try to emulate what the successful teams do. Rarely do you find someone who comes in and actually tries something different. Like the Rays with their bullpen day--that's weird but it may be something that works better for them than trotting out a a shitty fifth starter every five games.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

They don’t use it because they are too risky adverse and would rather lose doing something seeming normal than potentially lose doing something very different. This has changed a bit in baseball - take a look at the shift the dbacks used against DJ LeMahieu. There comes a point where if you know something doesn’t work maybe it’s time to see if you can do something better. Nobody knows if it’ll work because nobody has ever tried it long term.

I remember in Econ class we were talking about how the goalie guesses left or right on penalty kicks and going straight will yield the most goals (at least until everyone does it and the goalie adapts). But no one takes the risk of looking foolish.

 

[nyr2k2]

I remember in Econ class we were talking about how the goalie guesses left or right on penalty kicks and going straight forward will yield the most goals (at least until everyone does it and the goalie adapts). But no one takes the risk of looking foolish.

As someone who played goalie in soccer for almost 20 years, I will say that rarely is it a pure guess. You try to read the body language of the shooter as he approaches the ball--is he keeping his hips open? Is his foot square to the ball? Laces to the ball?--and then make an educated guess from there. I loved it when guys would try to get all fancy and "psyche me out" because usually they were moving slowly and by the time they approached the ball I had a decent sense of where they were going to go with it. The hardest guys were those that just came up and blasted it, and in those instances, yeah, you really did have to just guess, and shooting straight into the center of the goal would be a good option because no keeper wants to look foolish by just standing there. There are guys that will go straight at the keeper, or even chip it to the center of the net in the event the keeper can restrain his dive enough to manage to keep his feet near the center of the goal.

Your principle is absolutely correct though. There are definitely strategies that could be used that people are afraid to try simply out of potential embarrassment.

 

[Nopuckluck]

You have a point about knowing that the current strategy doesn't really work, but I wouldn't feel confident that a shadow job on the PP would be successful either. 4 on 3 PPs are inherently more dangerous than 5 on 4. Every single NHL player, if left open, is a threat to score. Some things just can't be defended - that's the beauty of it.

I actually have thought about doing this to myself for a few years now as it relates to Ovechkin. The Isles did this somewhat in the playoffs to him and it worked pretty good.

The Penguins used to play Lemieux on the PK and would make him stay out at the red line for breakaways. The other team would then leave a defender out there with him creating a 4 v 3

 

[SnowblindNYR]

As someone who played goalie in soccer for almost 20 years, I will say that rarely is it a pure guess. You try to read the body language of the shooter as he approaches the ball--is he keeping his hips open? Is his foot square to the ball? Laces to the ball?--and then make an educated guess from there. I loved it when guys would try to get all fancy and "psyche me out" because usually they were moving slowly and by the time they approached the ball I had a decent sense of where they were going to go with it. The hardest guys were those that just came up and blasted it, and in those instances, yeah, you really did have to just guess, and shooting straight into the center of the goal would be a good option because no keeper wants to look foolish by just standing there. There are guys that will go straight at the keeper, or even chip it to the center of the net in the event the keeper can restrain his dive enough to manage to keep his feet near the center of the goal.

Your principle is absolutely correct though. There are definitely strategies that could be used that people are afraid to try simply out of potential embarrassment.

Yeah, I told my dad this strategy and without even giving it thought he said "you can't kick forward". My guess is there are a lot of those types.

 

[SA16]

Had that same example in a game theory class during college.

Also the Rays bullpen days are definitely a good thing and would be way more effective than 3/4/5 starters but that runs into the problem of having a limited roster forcing guys to be unavailable on future days which could cause lingering issues. But if you know you 4/5 starters are way below average it’s somethjng worth trying.

 

[CasusBelli]

As someone who played goalie in soccer for almost 20 years, I will say that rarely is it a pure guess. You try to read the body language of the shooter as he approaches the ball--is he keeping his hips open? Is his foot square to the ball? Laces to the ball?--and then make an educated guess from there. I loved it when guys would try to get all fancy and "psyche me out" because usually they were moving slowly and by the time they approached the ball I had a decent sense of where they were going to go with it. The hardest guys were those that just came up and blasted it, and in those instances, yeah, you really did have to just guess, and shooting straight into the center of the goal would be a good option because no keeper wants to look foolish by just standing there. There are guys that will go straight at the keeper, or even chip it to the center of the net in the event the keeper can restrain his dive enough to manage to keep his feet near the center of the goal.

Your principle is absolutely correct though. There are definitely strategies that could be used that people are afraid to try simply out of potential embarrassment.

One could argue that a PK in hockey is very different from a PK in soccer. Any time I see Courtois or Neuer -- or, back in the day, Schmeichel or Kahn -- it's plain that there certainly is skilled involved. I will say, however, that soccer PKs are far more thrilling / nerve-racking than their hockey counterparts.

But, like you, I agree with the principle.

 

[Ola]

Even if you take out AO that PP is so good. Backstrom is an expert at constantly challenging the pocket between the D and forward. If you overload on Backstrom you can get the puck to Carlsson or the guy down low. If you don’t, he is so hard to get a hold of and he can often step in and take a shot in a prime scoring chance. They time it so well that they always get 3 guys going hard to the net when a shot is taken. Even if you got a shadow on AO, he will go to the net like a bull whenever a Carlson/Backstrom/Oshie/Kuz and co take a shot.

I think many opts to leave AO open because his shots aren’t always super efficient and it gives you some assurance as to what your job description. If your goalie fan across the crease and save the AO shot no goal will be scored. But the worst option is to do something in between, spread your box and have someone close to AO, but still let him fire away after getting top passes.

 

[Levitate]

Even if you take out AO that PP is so good. Backstrom is an expert at constantly challenging the pocket between the D and forward. If you overload on Backstrom you can get the puck to Carlsson or the guy down low. If you don’t, he is so hard to get a hold of and he can often step in and take a shot in a prime scoring chance. They time it so well that they always get 3 guys going hard to the net when a shot is taken. Even if you got a shadow on AO, he will go to the net like a bull whenever a Carlson/Backstrom/Oshie/Kuz and co take a shot.

I think many opts to leave AO open because his shots aren’t always super efficient and it gives you some assurance as to what your job description. If your goalie fan across the crease and save the AO shot no goal will be scored. But the worst option is to do something in between, spread your box and have someone close to AO, but still let him fire away after getting top passes.

Yeah as much as I have rolled my eyes at Caps fans saying "well you can't just cover Ovechkin because of the other guys!" it really pretty much is true. It may be worth it just to stick a guy on Ovechkin and let the rest of it turn into a 4 on 3, but you usually see teams try to split the difference and the Caps power play works to try to create a breakdown. They've got (or had) a guy up top who can bomb it (Carlson), stick someone like Oshie in the middle who can score from the slot, Backstrom or Kuznetsov distributing, it gets tough to effectively cover everything.

Compared to the Rangers PP when teams know they can lean more towards taking the shot away from Zibanejad. At least with Shattenkirk they have to respect him back there. he doesn't have a bomb of a shot but he's somehow good at picking corners from the blueline

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Had that same example in a game theory class during college.

Also the Rays bullpen days are definitely a good thing and would be way more effective than 3/4/5 starters but that runs into the problem of having a limited roster forcing guys to be unavailable on future days which could cause lingering issues. But if you know you 4/5 starters are way below average it’s somethjng worth trying.

Yeah, we were learning game theory that class.

 

[Waivers]

But, why? What's the point of shipping out young players to make a spot for a much older player that'll be here for a limited amount of time?

Gorton said Namestnikov is a guy they've been looking at for a while, so I doubt he's going anywhere. Spooner had flashes of being brilliant and both of these guys moved on from teams with Stanley Cup aspirations so it must've been a big shock/letdown for them to be traded.

Kreider / Zibs / Buch (or Fast who played well with that line)
Zucc / Hayes / Spooner (Namestnikov)
Vesey / Chytill / Andersson (Namestnikov)

Fast

That's 10/11 top 9 forwards already - I don't think Fast is a 4th line player (3rd at least). If vet Zuccarello is moved you've still got enough and this is if the Rangers stand pat and sign NO ONE. Personally, I'd rather see these young guys develop under a new system/coach together and make the mistakes they're going to make and learn from them instead of sitting in the press box while Kovalchuk takes his retirement skate around the NHL for a couple of years.

And, honestly, I don't think he's going to sign here anyway if he wants a shot at hardware. We'll see.

You're really not satisfied with that type of team depth, with the roster that you aforementioned, are you? Just overall bad depth, especially without Kovalchuk and any pending transactions. The team is nothing special already and interestingly enough there's an argument made for not wanting a proven asset who has always scored. Chytl, Buch, Andersson, etc., are going to get dogged out by themselves with a shitbag team unless some serious changes do happen over the summer. You are willing to put their development at stake. It's a much better idea to have a proven veteran take them under, and show them the way, regardless if Kovachuk has never won a Stanley Cup.

Stop riding a guy off because he's in his mid 30's. It costs us nothing but dollars, which we are willing to burn.

 

[NYR]

OV is always open because he's the best goal scorer in the league.
Every team always has a game plan to try and neutralize him but it doesn't work because he's simply that good.
Trying to reinvent a game plan just isn't going to work against a generational talent IMO.

 

[Richard Banger]

OV is always open because he's the best goal scorer in the league.
Every team always has a game plan to try and neutralize him but it doesn't work because he's simply that good.
Trying to reinvent a game plan just isn't going to work against a generational talent IMO.

Its like trying to stop Lebron James.. its not going to happen. So the better option is to prevent the others from scoring.

 

[Doctyl]

OV is always open because he's the best goal scorer in the league.
Every team always has a game plan to try and neutralize him but it doesn't work because he's simply that good.
Trying to reinvent a game plan just isn't going to work against a generational talent IMO.

Might as well not try something new because all the old stuff doesn’t work. That’s some impressive logic.

 

[NYR]

Might as well not try something new because all the old stuff doesn’t work. That’s some impressive logic.

You don't think every team in the league hasn't tried something "new" against this guy by now?
He's only been in the league for 13 years and NOBODY has been able to neutralize him.

He's an elite beast of a player and future HOF'r

What exactly is your big game plan?

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

OV is always open because he's the best goal scorer in the league.
Every team always has a game plan to try and neutralize him but it doesn't work because he's simply that good.
Trying to reinvent a game plan just isn't going to work against a generational talent IMO.

I always find it funny how the home crowd think their team should be the Harlem globetrotters and the opposing team is the Washington Generals [perma-losers]. I'm not saying I wouldn't want that, but the crowd sort of expects it. As if the opposing team is just canon fodder for them and doesn't have their own fan base wishings ills on MSG.

For example, when the King was on top of his game, I can recall several shooters stare into the heavens asking "whhyyyy..." when Henrik stoned them on a 99/100 shot.

So the same think goes for a sniper. They make their money well...sniping the corners, so sometimes Brett Hull is just going to roast you. Although technically an error, there is little way to fix it given the skill gap.

So far in the case of Ovie, teams can't neutralize his rail gun shot, yet they luck out when at some point the other 22 players doing all the work to get him the puck get I cured and tired, and he just doesn't give a shit anymore. For example, see the second round of the playoffs for over the last decade.