Ok Chuck, I'll play the be verbose as possible game with you. Teams have a defensive system in place to prevent second and third chances? Really? Do they bring bricks and mortar and build a wall? Does Bazin have a button he can push that causes a hole in the ice to open and swallow rebounds? What team doesn't TRY to limit access to the front of the net? Yeah you may not be able to dangle around 5 guys, but that makes the 2nd and 3rd opportunities all the more important. A defensive system, if effectively employed, can and will affect the type of first shots you allow. However offensive players have a right to skate into open space without being tackled to the ice, so with a little gumption and a little effort you can generate things like screens and tips and rebounds. Those become all the more important because of the reduced quality of the average first shot. I've been around hockey a long time and have never heard anything about a defensive system that inherently limits rebounds. You know what limits rebounds as a defensive player? Talent and effort. A good goaltender. And opposing forwards that aren't willing to pay the price.
C'mon Chuck. The point of the game is to score goals and it takes extra effort above and beyond systems. Forget the systems for a minute. Hockey is a game of 1 on 1 battles all over the ice. When you beat your man, you can make it a 2 on 1 somewhere else, albeit usually for a split second. Enough split seconds ultimately will add up to goals. Are there games (ie CC) where it's easier to win those 1 on 1 battles? Of course. Are there games (Lowell) where it's tougher? Of course. But let us not mistake Lowell for the Bruins. Lowell is a very good college hockey team, but why are we making excuses for UNH by just saying that Lowell is "good at their system" (which is a huge copout, btw). Of course they are...but UNH has a good coach too and the disparity in skill between these two teams is nowhere near the gulf you might imagine it to be after the scores of those games. If you want to argue that UNH isn't good enough or tough enough to win those 1 on 1 battles, then that is fine. I just happen to disagree with that based on other games I've seen.
Nobody is calling it some magical new revelation, those are your words Chuck. Alas that doesn't mean it isn't still maddening that they haven't been able to address this. It's a team culture issue at this point, and someone in the locker room is going to have to figure out that it isn't working, nor has it worked in the past and decide that they are going to be willing to pay the price. Since you love to follow back on your systems security blanket, if Lowell can "pay a premium" on effort in the middle of the ice, isn't that something that other teams would be quite capable of doing as well at the offensive end?
Good job going out on a limb and comparing a college hockey team to the Red Wings. Great apples to apples comparison there Chuck. So UNH shouldn't have guys that pay the price in front of the net because they don't have guys like Lidstrom and Yzerman who can get the puck to the net often enough. That's essentially what you just said there. That is, of course, a ridiculous notion. The fact that you went college vs. pro is insane to begin with. Look, there is ZERO reason that UNH could not/should not have multiple forwards willing to pay the price and get beat up on if it means banging home a rebound or two. It doesn't require the same level of skill as going end to end, all it takes is some heart and a big set of marbles. A quick stick around the net helps, too...but mostly it's about attitude and mentality and having an Eff you attitude that you're going to get a job done no matter what. Holmstrom had it. Guys like Holmstrom, Dave Andreychuk, and many, many others over the years have been effective NHL contributors because of that specific attribute. Best of all, they'd have tried to do it no matter who was around them on the ice, or who they were playing against. I bet they'd even have done it against a big bad college team like Lowell that has a system designed to limit access to the front of the net
As opposed to the teams that try to allow their opponents to get to the middle of the ice for great scoring chances? I know you've been a UNH fan for a long time so I forgive you if you have come to think that was an actual system employed by UNH over the years...but I assure you it is not.
Chuck, let me ask you. How does Lowell "clear out obstacles in front of their goal"? I don't think they are allowed to use heavy machinery or any kind of trickery, so I'm guessing the answer is through hard work, leverage, attitude, or other qualities that would be labeled similar. Why the heck can an offensive team not use those same qualities to keep their you know whats firmly planted in front of the goalie so that he can't get a good luck at pucks coming in from the perimeter? You know, that's what an overall offensive system should be trying to accomplish.
And it's not easy to just say "its their system!" 50 times in a post? I'm sorry that for me, I don't want to accept that UNH can do something against a bad team but not against a good team. Again, if its because they lack the ability, then so be it. But I haven't seen anyone making that argument. The only argument I've seen is the mystical UML system...which again is only a functioning system if their guys work hard and get their hands dirty. And they do, and that's why they are successful. If UNH were willing to do it a little (lot) more often, and more consistently against teams where it is hard to do it they would find a heck of a lot more success.
);