Power Play Question

[REV-G]

Our power play has been awful for what seems like an awfully long time. So I wonder if we are in a similar position as to where we found ourselves a number of years back when we seemed to be unable to find much needed centers for our team? Do you remember Marc Bergevin's comment, something like, "Good centers don't come easily" or "they're hard to find".  For some reason he couldn't get his hands on one whereas Kent Hughes found some rather quickly.

 

How is that connected to our lousy pp? Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't our PP very good when we had Markov as the pp quarterback. We had good forwards back then but I think we have enough good forwards now. What I think we're missing for our pp is another Markov, a good pp quarterback!

 

If that's a correct assumption, shouldn't we be able to go our and get one? How many more games would we win if our pp was clicking at just a normal rate instead of year after year being at the bottom of the league in that stat?

 

Or, is Kent Hughes intentionally waiting a year until Lane Hutson and or Logan M. make the team and could potentially fill that missing piece? Maybe it comes down to, should we go out and get one or wait till next year?  What we can't do is go back to the MB dilemma, "They are hard to find". If we want to genuinely find one, there must be some available somewhere, if that is our main problem on the pp.

 

What do you think?  

 

 

[alfredoh2009]

in my potato head, the first thing that comes to mind is the willingness to go to the front of the net and create obstruction, tap in rebounds. The Habs have had multiple Ds able to find the passing alleys but most forwards are peripheral players.

Gallagher got crippled without an enforcer to protect him, Anderson is not that type of player, and we are still missing that type of player. Maybe Slafkovsky will become that player, but he doesn't seem to like the rough stuff

[GHT120]

I agree with you that one of the big issues has been the lack of a quarterback ... the other is the lack of creativity/motion as the PP was focused on "get Shea the puck".

I think they are waiting for Hutson rather than seeking out a top-flight PPQB at this point in their rebuild.

MSL et al are responsible for the overall scheme ... I read speculation the other day that MSL seemed to be more involved in the PP this season ... makes one wonder what Burrows is bringing to the table.

[GHT120]

15 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

in my potato head, the first thing that comes to mind is the willingness to go to the front of the net and create obstruction, tap in rebounds. The Habs have had multiple Ds able to find the passing alleys but most forwards are peripheral players.

Gallagher got crippled without an enforcer to protect him, Anderson is not that type of player, and we are still missing that type of player. Maybe Slafkovsky will become that player, but he doesn't seem to like the rough stuff

The "front of the net player" on a PP is only useful if the team is effective at getting the puck to the net ... Habs were third last in shots on goal last season ... NHL offers no specifics about PP shots but I expect they were no better ... with a legit QB and better puck movement overall the "front of the net" will also get less crowded, as the defence reacts to the puck, and make it an easier space in which to work.

 

On the current roster I would like to see RHP as the primary net-front presence ... but a PP can't just park someone there ... others have to rotate in and out.

[Commandant]

I dont think the point is the issue.  Matheson is fine back there. 

 

The issue comes down to a few things 

 

1) zone entries.  Watch how many times the Habs try a drop pass in the neutral zone as their method of zone entry and it fails.  They need another plan for gaining possession in the offensive zone and setting up the powerplay.

 

2) too predictable.  They are trying to feed caufield the same way they always tried to feed weber.  Caufield is great and all but you need more options or the defence just takes it away.  Some sort of play to the guy in the bumper spot and some sort of play down low are needed 

 

3) more movement from players without the puck.  Make it harder for the other team to cover you 

[tomh009]

Just now, Commandant said:

1) zone entries.  Watch how many times the Habs try a drop pass in the neutral zone as their method of zone entry and it fails.  They need another plan for gaining possession in the offensive zone and setting up the powerplay.

 

2) too predictable.  They are trying to feed caufield the same way they always tried to feed weber.  Caufield is great and all but you need more options or the defence just takes it away.  Some sort of play to the guy in the bumper spot and some sort of play down low are needed 

 

3) more movement from players without the puck.  Make it harder for the other team to cover you 

This. Predictability has been a big bugbear for a long time. It was Caufield's one-timer last year, and before that it was Weber's cannon from the blue line. If the opponent doesn't know where the shot will come from it will be far more difficult for them to defend against it. And the increased movement plays into that as well.

 

It looks like St Louis is working on the predictability and movement now. Maybe. But zone entries ... I have not seen enough of those to be convinced that there is a solution to those yet.

 

But I agree with Commandant that the issue is less with the players and more with how they play on the man advantage. This is a coaching issue more than anything.

[alfredoh2009]

16 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

The "front of the net player" on a PP is only useful if the team is effective at getting the puck to the net ... Habs were third last in shots on goal last season ... NHL offers no specifics about PP shots but I expect they were no better ... with a legit QB and better puck movement overall the "front of the net" will also get less crowded, as the defence reacts to the puck, and make it an easier space in which to work.

 

On the current roster I would like to see RHP as the primary net-front presence ... but a PP can't just park someone there ... others have to rotate in and out.

 

RHP is not an NHL caliber  PP forward, bless his soul

 

when Caufield is clicking, the players at the point have been able to find him. Harris and Xhekaj are good passers. Matheson is a good QB but missed too many games. They've had puck carriers and average QBs over the years, but without the net presence, the goalies have had a clear look at the shot. 

[GHT120]

9 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

RHP is not an NHL caliber  PP forward, bless his soul

 

when Caufield is clicking, the players at the point have been able to find him. Harris and Xhekaj are good passers. Matheson is a good QB but missed too many games. They've had puck carriers and average QBs over the years, but without the net presence, the goalies have had a clear look at the shot. 

 

Harris, Xhekaj and even Matheson are (from what I have seen) adequate PPQBs at best ... the Habs need better to improve their PP as the rebuild progresses.

 

Didn't say RHP was an NHL power-forward, just that he seems to me the best option for PP front-of-the-net that is on the roster at the moment ... maybe Monahan, but it seems a waste to have his passing/vision stuck in the middle ... other option is to have enough movement on the PP for that role to be filled "by committee" so to speak, as players rotate in and out ... making it harder on the PK to target them.

[huzer]

20 minutes ago, Commandant said:

I dont think the point is the issue.  Matheson is fine back there. 

 

The issue comes down to a few things 

 

1) zone entries.  Watch how many times the Habs try a drop pass in the neutral zone as their method of zone entry and it fails.  They need another plan for gaining possession in the offensive zone and setting up the powerplay.

 

2) too predictable.  They are trying to feed caufield the same way they always tried to feed weber.  Caufield is great and all but you need more options or the defence just takes it away.  Some sort of play to the guy in the bumper spot and some sort of play down low are needed 

 

3) more movement from players without the puck.  Make it harder for the other team to cover you 

 

Quoted for emphasis. So much ALL OF THIS. The drop pass play always seems half-hearted and doesn't generate any speed. I think teams could post 4 guys within the face-off circle with Caufield and the Habs would still try and force the pick into him.

 

Whenever I'm watching a game, the commentators are constantly commenting on how aggressive the penalty killing teams are against the Habs. It's easy to be aggressive when the Habs are being static. 

[alfredoh2009]

Habs PP is too cute, and likes to move the puck around the periphery. No direct attack pressure

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

4 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

Harris, Xhekaj and even Matheson are (from what I have seen) adequate PPQBs at best ... the Habs need better to improve their PP as the rebuild progresses.

 

 

 

I agree, I think Mailloux will be the PP quarterback of the future. His puck handling skills and shot are elite. 

[dlbalr]

2 hours ago, REV-G said:

How is that connected to our lousy pp? Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't our PP very good when we had Markov as the pp quarterback. We had good forwards back then but I think we have enough good forwards now. What I think we're missing for our pp is another Markov, a good pp quarterback!

 

Not sure I agree with the bolded part.  There's a reason this team struggled to score last season and is projected to again this year - it's because they don't have enough good forwards.  Especially enough creative forwards; they basically have two of those on the whole team.

 

If you look at Montreal's projected power play units, there are some flaws.  Anderson is a guy who scores off the rush which doesn't help on the power play.  Gallagher is capable of skating to the net and getting cross-checked but not much more at this point of his career.  Slafkovsky could be an impact piece but he's not there yet.  Those three are probably regulars on the man advantage right now.  If they load up the top unit (which isn't saying much), their second wave won't be any more effective than a five-on-five unit.  They need more creative offensive threats up front which would help take away some of the predictability and lack of movement issues.

[REV-G]

19 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

Not sure I agree with the bolded part.  There's a reason this team struggled to score last season and is projected to again this year - it's because they don't have enough good forwards.  Especially enough creative forwards; they basically have two of those on the whole team.

 

If you look at Montreal's projected power play units, there are some flaws.  Anderson is a guy who scores off the rush which doesn't help on the power play.  Gallagher is capable of skating to the net and getting cross-checked but not much more at this point of his career.  Slafkovsky could get an impact piece but he's not there yet.  Those three are probably regulars on the man advantage right now.  If they load up the top unit (which isn't saying much), their second wave won't be any more effective than a five-on-five unit.  They need more creative offensive threats up front which would help take away some of the predictability and lack of movement issues.

That makes sense. Perhaps our desperate need for one or two elite snipers is showing up not just on 5 x 5 but on the pp as well.  I wonder if any of next years UFA's will have one we could sign.

 

If you look at our prospects I don't think we have an elite scorer in the ranks yet. Is free agency or a trade the only possible way to get one at this point? 

[dlbalr]

9 minutes ago, REV-G said:

That makes sense. Perhaps our desperate need for one or two elite snipers is showing up not just on 5 x 5 but on the pp as well.  I wonder if any of next years UFA's will have one we could sign.

 

If you look at our prospects I don't think we have an elite scorer in the ranks yet. Is free agency or a trade the only possible way to get one at this point? 

 

I don't see a big scorer in Montreal's system.  Some decent secondary options that could contribute on a power play, sure, but not the big go-to threats.  In the short term, they'll need to trade for or sign one and ideally, they can start drafting/developing some of those pieces.

[Prime Minister Koivu]

Commandant is right about zone entry. 
 

We have the most pathetic sling shot system that I’ve ever seen. The idea of the sling shot method is to hit the zone with speed but the Habs do not. 
 

The person picking up the puck after the drop pass should be skating at full speed. 

[DON]

NO all-Star forward on the roster or in system yet.

Suzuki, who was 70th best scorer in the NHL is best they got.

But, some of their PPs simply make my eyes bleed, just is so painful to watch same weak attempts over and over for several years now it seems.

Oh well, will help with high draft pick in 2024 i guess.

[Plutarch]

1 hour ago, DON said:

NO all-Star forward on the roster or in system yet.

Suzuki, who was 70th best scorer in the NHL is best they got.

But, some of their PPs simply make my eyes bleed, just is so painful to watch same weak attempts over and over for several years now it seems.

Oh well, will help with high draft pick in 2024 i guess.

I think Suzuki and Caufield are creative enough and skilled enough to be a very good power play. Matheson may also be.

 

However after that.... We just don't have anyone else I'd truly call creative. Maybe Slafkovsky can get there or at least be strong enough to create space that way. Still down another creative guy.

[TurdBurglar]

I’ll stand by what I’ve been saying for years and it’s been touched on by a few people here.  It’s the lack of threat anywhere except one player on the left side, by design.  It was Weber before Caufield.  
 

All plays target that one-timer on the left side.  The PP doesn’t try to create anything else.  The defence keeps a player close to Caufield and/or in his shooting lane.  They need to establish at least one other threat.  Ideally it’s something down low and/or on the other side of the ice to open the defence.  

[tomh009]

41 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

I’ll stand by what I’ve been saying for years and it’s been touched on by a few people here.  It’s the lack of threat anywhere except one player on the left side, by design.  It was Weber before Caufield.  
 

All plays target that one-timer on the left side.  The PP doesn’t try to create anything else.  The defence keeps a player close to Caufield and/or in his shooting lane.  They need to establish at least one other threat.  Ideally it’s something down low and/or on the other side of the ice to open the defence.  

That's exactly the predictability issue Commandant and I were talking about.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Interesting to read MSL say that the PP was not a priority last season. Now it's more of a priority and he takes shared responsibility for the result.

 

It's sort of fascinating how MSL really does seem to think very much in terms of stages: don't give a player, or a team, more than they're ready for. Focus on one foundational element before moving on to the next, etc.. 

 

Q&A: St. Louis thinks Canadiens are 'capable of taking a big step' (sportsnet.ca)

 

"We didn’t really work on the power play last year because it didn’t really matter, because we weren’t ready to win. We focused on five-on-five, and you can tell our five-on-five game in pre-season was pretty good. 

 

This year we’re diving in more to the special teams. Me and Alex (Burrows) run the power play and I’m as much to blame if it doesn’t do well, but the answers are everywhere, and we’ve got to find them. I know it’s an important part of the game, if we’re going to be successful. 

 

What makes a good power play? It’s a little bit of that one-brain mentality. 

 

But every position on the power play has different nuances of how to play it, and you almost have to teach those positions alone. At first, you’re teaching the five guys together, and we have our concepts about the point of attack. What makes for a good PP is understanding how the other team kills and how do we break that. 

 

Sometimes a PK will break itself. They make mistakes and break themselves. 

 

But can you take advantage of that versus having a set play? You have to find ways to break good PKs, and the way you break a fronting diamond and the way you break a pushed-down formation is totally different. 

 

So, I feel last year we dabbled into learning the rules of how to break different kinds of PKs. Now, once you’ve figured that out and, conceptually, you’re on the same page, now you work on the individuals in their positions and the nuances."

[Peter Puck]

  To me, it was clear that last year there was little reason to work on our power play.  It was bad because the system was bad but it helped the tank a lot.  St. Louis wanted to work on fundamentals which take time to learn and are more important than the PP.  He wanted to maximize improving 5 on 5 play which the players will need to master before we can be competitive.  When we are competitive we can spend time working on running the PP.  Until then a weak PP will continue to help the tank while at the same time allowing the young players to develop. 

 

  I'm not convinced that working on the PP will be a priority this year either.   

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

15 minutes ago, Peter Puck said:

  To me, it was clear that last year there was little reason to work on our power play.  It was bad because the system was bad but it helped the tank a lot.  St. Louis wanted to work on fundamentals which take time to learn and are more important than the PP.  He wanted to maximize improving 5 on 5 play which the players will need to master before we can be competitive.  When we are competitive we can spend time working on running the PP.  Until then a weak PP will continue to help the tank while at the same time allowing the young players to develop. 

 

  I'm not convinced that working on the PP will be a priority this year either.   

 

I don’t believe they have much interest in tanking. The goal is to get better results.

 

That doesn’t mean the PP is a priority, however. They clearly have a set of staggered priorities, which is reassuring because it suggests a longer-term orientation in terms of team and player development. MSL says the goal is to “dive in more” into special teams this season, so although the PP is not a top priority, it is something they plan to start working on. 

[hab29RETIRED]

10 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I don’t believe they have much interest in tanking. The goal is to get better results.

 

That doesn’t mean the PP is a priority, however. They clearly have a set of staggered priorities, which is reassuring because it suggests a longer-term orientation in terms of team and player development. MSL says the goal is to “dive in more” into special teams this season, so although the PP is not a top priority, it is something they plan to start working on. 

They don’t need to tank. Unless progression of the D takes a big step forward and we suddenly have elite goaltending, we will finish between bottom 5 and bottom 10. 
Next year is where I expect we MAY have a legit chance of getting into the playoffs - even than depends on forwards like Slafkovsky and Roy taking a big step forward by the end of this year and Reinbacher and Hutson being impactful next year.

 

This is another development year, where we will be better, but still not very good.

[hockeyrealist]

Some good points made already, the thing that stands out to me is the handedness of the PP QB.

CC is the shooter, he is a righty and parked on his off wing ( to the left of the QB who is at top of diamond ).

A RH QB can feed CC quickly and with less tells than a LH QB can, and all of our QB’s recently are lefties.  A lefty has to rotate to make a good pass to their left (backhands obv an option but risky), having to rotate to feed CC slows the play down and creates an obvious tell that CC is getting the puck and likely going to shoot, the kid is a sniper.  A RH QB could feed CC w/o having to rotate their body while also still staying in position to put pucks on net. This creates a double threat and also allows for quicker passes to CC and higher success rates for the number one target.

For this reason, Id like to see Suzuki play the QB position at top of point with a lefty of the right side who can either shoot or go cross seam to CC, Matheson is the obv choice.

The QB now has two one-timer options and can get option 1 (CC) the puck quicker, so defence has less time to adjust. If they are cheating to CC then Suzuki either creates for himself or uses the left side.

A left hand shot at the top of diamond does not allow for smooth feeds to the left side shooter (CC) as easily as a right shot does. 
Tired of watching LH QB’s have to pivot to pass to CC and everyone knowing where it is going.

[GHT120]

50 minutes ago, hockeyrealist said:

Some good points made already, the thing that stands out to me is the handedness of the PP QB.

CC is the shooter, he is a righty and parked on his off wing ( to the left of the QB who is at top of diamond ).

A RH QB can feed CC quickly and with less tells than a LH QB can, and all of our QB’s recently are lefties.  A lefty has to rotate to make a good pass to their left (backhands obv an option but risky), having to rotate to feed CC slows the play down and creates an obvious tell that CC is getting the puck and likely going to shoot, the kid is a sniper.  A RH QB could feed CC w/o having to rotate their body while also still staying in position to put pucks on net. This creates a double threat and also allows for quicker passes to CC and higher success rates for the number one target.

For this reason, Id like to see Suzuki play the QB position at top of point with a lefty of the right side who can either shoot or go cross seam to CC, Matheson is the obv choice.

The QB now has two one-timer options and can get option 1 (CC) the puck quicker, so defence has less time to adjust. If they are cheating to CC then Suzuki either creates for himself or uses the left side.

A left hand shot at the top of diamond does not allow for smooth feeds to the left side shooter (CC) as easily as a right shot does. 
Tired of watching LH QB’s have to pivot to pass to CC and everyone knowing where it is going.

 

Of course, a PP built around feeding CC on the left half-boards is as predictable as was the Weber-PP (whether he was on the point or on the left-side) ... it is worth noting that great PP scorers like Ovechkin and Stamkos often score from "Caufield's Kitchen" from cross-ice passes as that also maximizes how far the goalie has to move.