"With two cups, it is hard to argue the merits of a very structured system. That being said, know that this systematic approach has its flaws. When it is good, it is very very good. It is crisp, hard to stop, and almost robotic in execution and implementation. When it is bad it is an out of synch and impotent mess that limits individual creativity."
Amen. It is nigh unstoppable when on. I still think the 2014 Sharks series was a perfect example of both being off and a good team countering it by forcing us to play their game. I'd say the Hawks series was the same thing, but they have a history of doing that period, not just in that series. We don't have the speed or offensive skill to get off that structure and trade chances with SJS and CHI and ANA, so that's exactly why those teams are okay with sowing chaos, especially vs. us--they can just out-talent us and most other teams, all they need is an effective forecheck/defensive system (obviously easier said than done, I know) and they don't even bother to control it for a breakout, they just transition immediately to take advantage of our players being out of position...part of the reason we were able to overcome that in 2014 vs. the Hawks was the 70s line having the ability to play pond hockey in transition.
Ramble ramble ramble. But yeah, I like it, good overview of the perks and drawbacks of 'the system'. I think much of the sloppiness IS attributable to being early in the season/unprepared (not that that's acceptible), playing teams that will be a pain all year, and that everyone knows exactly what we're going to do at all times--the predictability helps our players really nail down the system (options nonwithstanding), but also helps the opponents know who to mark at all times and stand up at the blueline to force a dump in since it's almost inevitable we'll be going 2v3 with our controlled breakout.
