Canuck Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 This may sound absurd considering we are statistically dreadful on the power play, but I think everyone is making too much of this slump. First of all, yes, the numbers are dreadful, but in my opinion it appears to be "just one of those things." I think the danger here if you're the Sioux would be to overanalyze the PP woes to the point that it becomes paralysis by analysis. If you're a regular Sioux hockey observer (and obviously everyone on this board is), you'll notice that the power-play woes haven't been for a lack of scoring chances. In fact, over the past two weekends alone we've had several scoring chances on the power play; the puck just isn't going in. With the talent we have, you throw them out there in a 5-on-4 and they're bound to create scoring opportunities with or without a "system" in place. It's just like a player in a scoring slump, eventually you'll get one flukey one and then you'll get on a roll. That said, I think Blais and the coaches have done the necessary tinkering to help things along. Moving Lundbohm off the point was the first good move; he hangs on to the puck too long, and is very susceptible to giving up odd-man rushes. I would like to see the Sioux stick to using D-men on the point; we have three of the best in Schneider, Jones and Fuher. Now that they seem to be better at avoiding their shots being blocked, there's no reason to not use any of those three on the PP. What does bother me is the fans' lack of patience at the arena while on the PP. Yelling "Shoooooooot....shoooooooot" each time the puck reaches a new stick is assinine. Obviously you don't score if you don't shoot, but at the same time you still have to be somewhat selective and pick your spots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 I'm glad to hear the Sioux will be using the umbrella a bit more. It may lead to more posession time in the zone for them. From my observations, the Sioux have been using an overload system, making them too vulnerable to the weak-side clear when they lose puck support along the end boards. I think the umbrella will keep teams a bit more honest when they get the chance to clear the zone. I posted Friday night about the D-men playing the opposite points, and I'll be interested to see if this is the strategy the coaching staff uses when running the umbrella. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoteauRinkRat Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 What does bother me is the fans' lack of patience at the arena while on the PP. Yelling "Shoooooooot....shoooooooot" each time the puck reaches a new stick is assinine. Obviously you don't score if you don't shoot, but at the same time you still have to be somewhat selective and pick your spots. I agree. It is tough enough when you are in a slump on the power play, but to have your fans screaming at you really doesn't help matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Is it just me or does anyone else think a better choice in front of the net would be someone who knows how to score, like Bo, or Massen, or Genoway or at least someone NOT a defensive defenseman? I said Greene and Smaby for one reason: Size. Again, I'll use the Red Wings as an example. Tomas Holmstrom can score, but he's not really known as a scoring forward. He's more of an immovable rock the Wings place in front of the net to drive the goalie wild and get a good screen going to score. That's why I suggested Greene and Smaby. Like BC with Boyle. And you know what? BC scored using that strategy. Boyle managed to shoot one in. But I think the same results can be met by putting offensive minded people in front such as Bo, McMahon, Stafford, Genoway, and perhaps even Prpich, Hale, and Schneider. The point is getting size in front of the net and having that person be good at not getting moved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skateshattrick Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 This may sound absurd considering we are statistically dreadful on the power play, but I think everyone is making too much of this slump. First of all, yes, the numbers are dreadful, but in my opinion it appears to be "just one of those things." I think the danger here if you're the Sioux would be to overanalyze the PP woes to the point that it becomes paralysis by analysis. If you're a regular Sioux hockey observer (and obviously everyone on this board is), you'll notice that the power-play woes haven't been for a lack of scoring chances. In fact, over the past two weekends alone we've had several scoring chances on the power play; the puck just isn't going in. With the talent we have, you throw them out there in a 5-on-4 and they're bound to create scoring opportunities with or without a "system" in place. It's just like a player in a scoring slump, eventually you'll get one flukey one and then you'll get on a roll. That said, I think Blais and the coaches have done the necessary tinkering to help things along. Moving Lundbohm off the point was the first good move; he hangs on to the puck too long, and is very susceptible to giving up odd-man rushes. I would like to see the Sioux stick to using D-men on the point; we have three of the best in Schneider, Jones and Fuher. Now that they seem to be better at avoiding their shots being blocked, there's no reason to not use any of those three on the PP. What does bother me is the fans' lack of patience at the arena while on the PP. Yelling "Shoooooooot....shoooooooot" each time the puck reaches a new stick is assinine. Obviously you don't score if you don't shoot, but at the same time you still have to be somewhat selective and pick your spots. I could not have said it better! Your observations about Lundbohm, using 2 D and the fans' lack of patience are right on. You don't want to take a shot when the goalie has a clean look from the point because he will make that save 99.9% of the time. The idea is to get him moving so he cannot adjust to the shot, or get a screen in front. I like the 3 forwards that the Sioux use (Parise, Bochenski and Murray), but I could see putting Massen or Stafford in front of the net, at least on the 2nd unit. They both are big and strong, but have very good hands and can shoot the puck. I have often wondered why the Sioux don't use Massen like the Gophers use Potulny. Neither are great skaters, but both have big bodies and excellent hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux fan in phoenix Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Dang it, dagies, I already forwarded the thread to the hockey office so the coaches could use it to fix the PP, then you go and put another idea on here. Is everyone done now so I can send it to Blais again? You're joking, right? Sounds like you are but I'm not sure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux fan in phoenix Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 I'd like an expert to explain how the umbrella works. 1) Remove from closet. 2) Stand in doorway. 3) Open door. 4) Open umbrella by clicking button. 5) Close door & have a nice walk in the rain. Sorry, I'm bored & need my nightly fix of PCM's recap of The Coach's Show. BTW, is someone going to call Blaiser tonight & offer what we've discussed here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 You're joking, right? Sounds like you are but I'm not sure... SFiP quick, delete your post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 I am not am expert, but I was going to try to explain, until I found this link. Umbrella Powerplay This is excellent for me. I like this idea too. IMO, the Sioux spent a lot of time cycling the puck down low, and only sometimes had a guy parked to take advantage of a rebound. We did create some opportunities but didn't bury enough of them. Looks like this system is going to have a couple of guys available in rebound space, and we can work the puck around the top of the umbrella and fire away when there is an opportunity. There'll be more bodies around the goalie but we'll also have twice as many sticks available to slap home a rebound, hopefully. Looks like it's worth a try to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux fan in phoenix Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I think that we get more shots off on the power play when we have guys moving around. There was a lot of standing still going on the first part of the year on the power play, but now guys are finally starting to move a little bit with and without the puck. I thought Friday night we made strides on improving, but then we just went back to zero on Saturday. The triangle really works well for the gophers though, and I think UND should give it a try. Put Schneider or Fuher out on the point as the trigger man with Zpar and Murray on the wings and and Bobo and Fuher/Schneider pounding it out in front of the net we could score some goals. But I'm not the coach, let Blais figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I think that we get more shots off on the power play when we have guys moving around. There was a lot of standing still going on the first part of the year on the power play, but now guys are finally starting to move a little bit with and without the puck. I thought Friday night we made strides on improving, but then we just went back to zero on Saturday. The triangle really works well for the gophers though, and I think UND should give it a try. Put Schneider or Fuher out on the point as the trigger man with Zpar and Murray on the wings and and Bobo and Fuher/Schneider pounding it out in front of the net we could score some goals. But I'm not the coach, let Blais figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKNTSMN Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Why don't they have two units and if one doesn't score in first minute make a change. I think that they should find out who can take charge and run the Power Play so far the numbers for the last 2 years have not been good. Who runs the Power Play...? Who is the quarter back? Who starts the plays..? I think you need two guys and have two groups competing for the great opportunity to be on the Power Play on the # 1 team in the country. I think the standard should be 25% to 30% with the talent that is on this team. I think that competition and not being tired are two good reasons to have two well organized units that may even run different looks... But if one attack is very successful both need to know how to run the different attacks. Hard to believe how inept the numbers are with the guys on this team. I think it is better to get better at this toward the end when special teams are the difference. But it is nice to be good all the time. I have not seen what they are doing but I know they tend to put it all on the big guns and often times their are quite a few guys that given the chance perform well with an extra attacker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I think it is better to get better at this toward the end when special teams are the difference. I think this is Blais' strategy. He's having the team save all its power play goals for March and April when they really count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoggy Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Somebody mentioned earlier that Parise could/should play point (couldn't find the quote when I scanned for it). I like this idea. Even if it is for a little bit. Rotate a defenseman in front and keep Parise on top. Powerplays tend to be run from up top. Our best playmaker is Parise. We know he can shoot, but he could also shoot/pass towards other players. And after watching him against Vanek, we know he can play defense. Powerplays work best when someone penetrates and causes the defense to move (people might think I'm talking bball). We don't want to give up shorties, but it just seems we are too afraid of giving them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaNorthStar Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I don't know if I like the idea of Parise on the point. As you saw in the Minnesota series having a forward at the point on the PP (Vanek) can produce a lot of chances for shorties to happen. We should compromise and stick Marvin or Hale up there, a F/D. Remember it's only November, we'll get it up around 90% or so in March and April Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoggy Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I don't know if I like the idea of Parise on the point. As you saw in the Minnesota series having a forward at the point on the PP (Vanek) can produce a lot of chances for shorties to happen. We should compromise and stick Marvin or Hale up there, a F/D. Remember it's only November, we'll get it up around 90% or so in March and April I was thinking of more of a rotation thing. I don't like a forward up there either. But maybe where Parise moves up and a D-man moves down and vice versa. Something. Anything just to get some movement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I don't know if I like the idea of Parise on the point. As you saw in the Minnesota series having a forward at the point on the PP (Vanek) can produce a lot of chances for shorties to happen. We should compromise and stick Marvin or Hale up there, a F/D. Agreed about Parise. If he's on PP, I'd rather have him down low, preferably sitting off to the side. His presence down there might also serve to distract one or more defenders, as well as the goalie. He's too small to plant in front of the goal, unlike Money or Stafford. Money is very strong on the puck and he's good at picking up garbage shots too, so he might draw more than one guy right on him and free up the puck for another shot opportunity. A bigger forward or D-man QBing from the point would help prevent a shortie rush, and serve to plant anybody thinking about carrying the puck out. Prpich has played D and O in Canada, so he would be a good choice for F/D. Jones and/or Schneider could hold the other point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I managed time to watch the first period of the Saturday MN series tonite. In the one PP I paid attention to the Sioux first line never even got set up. The second unit was out for the last minute and they were able to cycle the puck. But this I found interesting, they played almost the whole minute on one side of the offensive zone. With that little space it seems it would be much easier for the shorthanded team to cover. There were 2 defensemen at the blue line, a forward at the half-wall, one in the corner, and one in front of the net. And they really didn't cycle it that much, just pass it around that half of the ice. It was only one PP. I plan to pay closer attention from now on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Here's one more spin on the power-play situation that seems to have gone unnoticed so far. First, let me begin by saying I believe Dean Blais is arguably the best coach in college hockey, mainly for being able to spot talent, particularly diamonds in the rough like the Goehrings and Panzers, and then for being able to get the most out of said talent without having to rely on "systems." Having said that, I've been in Grand Forks nine years now and I was thinking that I don't remember our power play ever being that great under Blais. So I did a little digging to either verify or contradict what I was thinking. Take a look at UND's PP in recent years, including some of the big guns we had during each of those years: 2002-03 Bochenski, Parise, Lundbohm, Schneider, Massen... 23.2% 2001-02 Bayda, Skarperud, Bochenski, Schneekloth, Lundbohm... 18.7% 2000-01 Panzer, B. Lundbohm, Bayda, Roche, Dorey, Skarperud... 20.0% 1999-00 Goren, Panzer, Ulmer, B. Lundbohm, Bayda, Dorey, Roche.... 23.5% 1998-99 Blake, Jay Panzer, Jeff Panzer, Williamson, Goren, Hoogsteen, Jeff Ulmer 23.9% 1997-98 Blake, Hoogsteen, Murphy, Jay Panzer, Henderson, Jeff Panzer, Williamson 19.9% 1996-97 Hoogsteen, Blake, Murphy, Panzer, Kallay, Calder, K. Hoogsteen 23.3% 1995-96 Wynne, Kallay, Mitani, Naumenko 25.0% The numbers show, with the possible exception of 95-96, the PP has been decidedly average in recent years despite an abundance of offensive talent. So what does this mean? Essentially, it means nothing. It means that despite an average power-play, only a fool could argue with Coach Blais' track record of winning. Would a more efficient power play help? Obviously. But it certainly shouldn't be cause for alarm. We've proven in the past that few teams can match up against UND at 5-on-5, and that appears to be the case again this year. And with the talent we have, the potential will always be there for PP success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmidtdoggydog Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I don't think it is any coincidence that the year with the highest pp percentage (95-96) was the year that they used a defensemen with an absolute rocket at the point to blast shots at the net. I don't think either Schneider or Fuher shoot the puck as hard or fast as Naumenko, but they aren't too far behind and that is why I would like to see them both on the point blasting away. Naumenko was great at getting the puck and firing it on net - good things happen when that is done! Slow, weak wrist shots from the point (Lundbohm) won't ever cut it in this league. btw, this is not a knock on Lundbohm who is a very good player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I don't think it is any coincidence that the year with the highest pp percentage (95-96) was the year that they used a defensemen with an absolute rocket at the point to blast shots at the net. I don't think either Schneider or Fuher shoot the puck as hard or fast as Naumenko, they aren't too far behind and that is why I would like to see them both on the point blasting away. Naumenko was great at getting the puck and firing it on net - good things happen when that is done! Slow, weak wrist shots from the point (Lundbohm) won't ever cut it in this league. btw, this is not a knock on Lundbohm who is a very good player. I think both Schneider and Fuher have good shots from the point. Both have had key goals in recent series. Fuher, remember, won the Denver series with a shot from inside the blue line center ice. Since I have never seen Naumenko play (sad for me), I can only say that his shot must have been spectacular. Whatever happened to him anyways? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmidtdoggydog Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I think both Schneider and Fuher have good shots from the point. Both have had key goals in recent series. Fuher, remember, won the Denver series with a shot from inside the blue line center ice. Since I have never seen Naumenko play (sad for me), I can only say that his shot must have been spectacular. Whatever happened to him anyways? He and Jason Herter had two of the hardest shots I have seen at the college level. The kind of slapshots that made the fans oooh and aaah everytime they would wind up. Naumenko is a career minor leaguer. Herter, a former first round draft pick who played for UND in the early 90's, was also a career minor leaguer, but played one game in the NHL for the Islanders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Those numbers confirm my recollection as well. Our PP has never been top shelf. It will get better however, 6% or so success is an anomaly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoteauRinkRat Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Naumenko was a very good player. His shot was tremendous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.