We do 3v3 OT wrong

[andora]

Are you seriously calling that possession? LOL that’s a joke.

EDIT* are you talking the turnover in the offensive zone? Or the deflection that lead to the goal?

the offensive zone.. the one that the poster who posted the video was referencing

 

[Rhynne]

I also think Rielly is the wrong defenseman to start OT with. He's horrendous on 2 on 1's and OT naturally has an abundance of them. I'd rather have Lilly or Brodie out there instead of Mo

 

[Larcos_Unal]

I don't think there's anything wrong with starting Matthews, Marner & Rielly. I think there's something very wrong with how they play however.

It's like they're expecting for it to be a back and forth battle and that the goalie is gonna bail them out if they give up 2 on 1s and breakaways. If they don't win the opening faceoff it's pretty much game over.

 

[Rhynne]

Overtime can be a different animal, but is there anything you want to see your group do differently in those situations after three straight losses?

Keefe: There are some things about three-on-three that are very unpredictable and reactionary. The Dallas game works out for us, but last night is the one that is most fresh in my mind. Obviously, you just have to defend the middle of the ice a lot better, and also hang onto the puck. We had the puck, won the faceoff, and gave it up far too easily. Possession is a huge piece of the game in general, but at three-on-three, it’s even more so.

Little things like that I think we can do a better job of, but three-on-three is a little bit chaotic. We want to be better in that area, but we have a lot of other things that are higher up the list for me.
---------
I'm a fan of Keefe generally but I hate this quote which I bolded. The Leafs have thrown away a lot of points with their high risk/low reward style in OT over his tenure Even if it's not the highest priority to work on, they SHOULD spend more time practicing it and adjusting their play to get better. The quote above just makes it seem like they don't really care if they lose that extra point.

 

[Judas Tavares]

Marner has been the worst offender 3on3 for years. My heart rate sky rockets when he's out there cause you just know he's going to make a high risk play that leads to nothing but an odd-man rush the other way.

I also think this team struggles (not just 3on3 but 5on5 too) at breakaways and 2on1s. I have no clue how you could find this stat without going through each game individually, and maybe it is since I follow this team the most so I see them the most. But honestly, on breakaways this team shoots at the pads trying to go 5 hole or whips it high and wide trying to go high.

2on1s, they always try the pass and it seems it never gets through or if it does it's a poor pass. Should have more confidence to shoot it, but as mentioned above, this team seems to shoot it high and wide.

Then you see the Reilly Smith 2on1 and breakaway. Both done to perfection. Happens a lot against us. Not sure if you can blame goaltending as much as the opposing team just executing properly.

Just an observation I've had.

 

[The Iceman]

malgin at 3 on 3 should be a staple just saying.

You could be right.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

malgin at 3 on 3 should be a staple just saying.

That kind of time and space? He would tear people apart...

 

[Lightsol]

This sample size is large enough. Keefe needs to stop starting that trio in OT.

I would argue that the big problem in 3v3 is starting Reilly at all... At least until he learns how to properly handle a 2 on 1. 'Cause those are INCREDIBLY common in 3v3 OT and he absolutely sucks ass at defending them.

 

[egd27]

Of our 3 main centre men, why would you start the one with the lowest face off win percentage in a situation where possession is the name of the game?

 

[Tak7]

You guys are badly overthinking this - the point of OT is to win the game. If the big 3 go up the ice and win it in OT on their own, like they have done in the past, no one complains.

The entire strategy isn't flawed just because of 2 bad plays / turnovers this season.

Of our 3 main centre men, why would you start the one with the lowest face off win percentage in a situation where possession is the name of the game?

Matthews won the draw.

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

I'm not sure you can really call a less than 19 minute sample "large enough", especially with such a chaotic environment like 3v3. They haven't really been spectacular in that small sample, but a lot of that goal differential is probably just noise. Nobody is going to have a great goal differential when you're getting 0.467 goaltending. And if you take any combination of 2 of those 3 players over that same timeframe, they are 7-0. I'd imagine there's a lot of one person changed off by the time they score happening here.

I think we can safely say it's a trend given how volatile 3 on 3 OT is and how often it backfires on us. The TOI will always be smaller just based on how OT works. Yes the goaltending has awful numbers but how many grade A chances are they facing due to defensive misplays or the general nature of 3 on 3 OT being more open?

2/3 having a good record just tells me that all 3 of those guys should not be on the ice at the same time, at the very least they should not be starting OT together. It's too offence focused and yeah that works if you get the puck but if you don't well the record speaks for itself.

You guys are badly overthinking this - the point of OT is to win the game. If the big 3 go up the ice and win it in OT on their own, like they have done in the past, no one complains.

The entire strategy isn't flawed just because of 2 bad plays / turnovers this season.

The thing is that trio more often than not doesn't win the game.

 

[Tak7]

The thing is that trio more often than not doesn't win the game.

Is this statistically accurate?
I wouldn't know where to find these details.

 

[ToneDog]

Of our 3 main centre men, why would you start the one with the lowest face off win percentage in a situation where possession is the name of the game?

I recall starting JT and fans bitching because he was too slow after an OT loss. Guess you could start JT with Mitch and switch with Matty after gaining possession.

 

[Mickey Marner]

Doesn't look like they practice it at all. It's ironic how they'll keep possession to a fault at 5v5, yet are so careless about possession at 3v3. Most teams have a set play off of a faceoff win, yet we appear to always just be winging it.

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

Is this statistically accurate?
I wouldn't know where to find these details.

The stat is referenced here: Game in 10: Shorthanded goal against costs the Maple Leafs a point in OT loss to Vegas

 

[Tak7]

The stat is referenced here: Game in 10: Shorthanded goal against costs the Maple Leafs a point in OT loss to Vegas

Thanks.

Matthews/Marner/Rielly trio have been outscored 8-1 in OT.

That's actually pretty shocking - you'd think high end talent like theirs would actually thrive at that stage of the game, where more open ice lends itself to higher skill.

 

[egd27]

I recall starting JT and fans bitching because he was too slow after an OT loss. Guess you could start JT with Mitch and switch with Matty after gaining possession.

That's what I would consider.
Or even Kampf. If he's wins the draw, he swaps out immediately, if not, he's one of our more defensively responsible guys to try and recover the puck.

Matthews won the draw.

That time......but why not play the odds?

 

[Tak7]

That time......but why not play the odds?

Because Tavares is too slow for 3 on 3

 

[Judas Tavares]

Don't feel like looking this up, so I could be completely wrong. But I feel like the Leafs happen to lose in OT a lot within the first 1:30. Their first few chances if they even happen to get them never convert, whereas I feel like the other team needs one or two to convert. Feels like most of the wins the Leafs get occur when the chances go back and forth for 3 or 4 minutes.

 

[BayStBullies]

Doesn't look like they practice it at all. It's ironic how they'll keep possession to a fault at 5v5, yet are so careless about possession at 3v3. Most teams have a set play off of a faceoff win, yet we appear to always just be winging it.

The team performs like they don't practice anything. If not for the talent on this team, Keefe would be exposed earlier.

 

[Jmo89]

This sample size is large enough. Keefe needs to stop starting that trio in OT.

That would require Keefe do something beyond just play his best players (stats-wise) and hope for the best.

Maybe he can bench a 3rd liner again? If he makes Marner sit too long to start OT he will be chasing him around the next day to offer an apology.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I think we can safely say it's a trend given how volatile 3 on 3 OT is and how often it backfires on us. The TOI will always be smaller just based on how OT works. Yes the goaltending has awful numbers but how many grade A chances are they facing due to defensive misplays or the general nature of 3 on 3 OT being more open?

2/3 having a good record just tells me that all 3 of those guys should not be on the ice at the same time, at the very least they should not be starting OT together. It's too offence focused and yeah that works if you get the puck but if you don't well the record speaks for itself.

The volatility of 3v3 is one of the reasons why we should be hesitant to label it a trend because of the trio on the ice.
0.467 isn't just "awful numbers". It's mind-numbingly bad numbers. That is worse than one should expect from unimpeded breakaways, or any type of chance.
The trio has a grand total of -1 high danger chances and -1 high danger goals relative to their opponent, which isn't great, but that's not what's causing a -7 goal differential. The problem is our goalies allowing mid-danger goals at a ridiculous rate.
I don't really know what you mean by "too offense-focused". Putting aside that Matthews/Marner are both very good defensive forwards, 3v3 OT as a game state is offense focused.
What does happen in OT is that you tend to rotate players off one at a time much more than as a unit. That seems to be having an impact here. What seems to happen is that we start OT, we get the puck and get a chance, and it gets saved. It goes the other way, and one of two things happens:
1. Our goalie lets in a mid-danger chance and the trio gets hit with a -1.
2. Our goalie makes the save, we rush back up the ice, the 3rd trailing player changes in the process, and then we score, but because of the change, it gets counted as a +1 for combinations of 2 of the 3 instead of the trio together.

 

[ACC1224]

The team performs like they don't practice anything. If not for the talent on this team, Keefe would be exposed earlier.

I'm sure everyone agrees that it's pretty hard to see the team progressing any further until they make a coaching change.
Immense talent can only take you so far.

 

[therealkoho]

So those three have been outscored in OT, geepers I'm not even sure by how much or anything or even if its true, but maybe they should play different players with those guys or better yet maybe win the game before its OT. Maybe that is the solution. Sometimes I think if we read the whole thread we might have all the info that was on page one.

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

The volatility of 3v3 is one of the reasons why we should be hesitant to label it a trend because of the trio on the ice.
0.467 isn't just "awful numbers". It's mind-numbingly bad numbers. That is worse than one should expect from unimpeded breakaways, or any type of chance.
The trio has a grand total of -1 high danger chances and -1 high danger goals relative to their opponent, which isn't great, but that's not what's causing a -7 goal differential. The problem is our goalies allowing mid-danger goals at a ridiculous rate.
I don't really know what you mean by "too offense-focused". Putting aside that Matthews/Marner are both very good defensive forwards, 3v3 OT as a game state is offense focused.
What does happen in OT is that you tend to rotate players off one at a time much more than as a unit. That seems to be having an impact here. What seems to happen is that we start OT, we get the puck and get a chance, and it gets saved. It goes the other way, and one of two things happens:
1. Our goalie lets in a mid-danger chance and the trio gets hit with a -1.
2. Our goalie makes the save, we rush back up the ice, the 3rd trailing player changes in the process, and then we score, but because of the change, it gets counted as a +1 for combinations of 2 of the 3 instead of the trio together.

Matthews and Marner are good defensively at 5 on 5, but in 3 on 3 the positioning is different with four fewer players overall on the ice and M&M take too many risks at 3 on 3. Rielly for all his offensive gifts is a very poor defensive player despite his position and is incapable of defending any odd man rush.

Let's assume your order of events is true, how many more goals for are we accounting for here? Enough that the record would be 8-8, 7 more goals for in OT with those three? That seems like a stretch. In any event I went through OT goals against the past three seasons and while some goals against this trio are the result of a great shot or a great play or a missed offensive chance being turned around on us, half of the 8 goals against with this trio are missed coverage odd man rushes that see Rielly incapable of blocking a pass and a goal being scored against. 3 of those four goals are within the first minute, which is why I'm advocating starting a more defensively capable defenseman in OT over Rielly until we get control of the puck and can reset and then throw Rielly on. Could we have gained more points if it was Brodie on the ice instead? Maybe.