Why the Hawks PP is so woeful - article

Oct 3, 2014

• #1

roshinaya

fnord

Donator

Joined:

May 15, 2010

Posts:

3,533

Liked Posts:

457

Good run down on why the PP is so shit for the Hawks considering the talent they have at their disposal.</p>


 </p>


http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/594202</p>


 </p>


Basically it's setup wrong and the players have few options. Blame Q.</p>

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #2

BiscuitintheBasket

CCS Donator

Donator

Joined:

May 15, 2010

Posts:

3,802

Liked Posts:

0

Wonder if, for some of the setups he griped about if he checked the results from other teams. That first one in particular has given plenty of other teams success or, at the least, keeping control of the puck in the o-zone.

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #3

Shantz My Pants

New member

Joined:

Dec 10, 2014

Posts:

3,923

Liked Posts:

787

Nice to see someone else follow and read Justin Bourne. His team traits articles this past offseason have been killer.


The biggest issue in my opinion outside of the setup is the Hawks lack of puck movement. They keep it on the same wall side as Kane, who holds it for 20 seconds, and then makes a pass that does nothing. If I'm a PKer against our PP, all you need to do is keep Kane contained and the whole PP breaks down.


On his set up he drew out, I'd still swap Kane and Toews as Kane has the better vision.

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #4

EspoForever

New member

Joined:

Jun 4, 2010

Posts:

470

Liked Posts:

0

Location:

North Muskegon, MI

I have been saying for 2 years I think Sharp does us much more good off the left half wall than at the point. And if they have a boner for a right shot on the point, the last time I looked, we have this guy named Seabrook that's actually playing his normal position when he's on the point. Ugh.

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #5

Tater

CCS Donator

Donator

Joined:

May 15, 2010

Posts:

13,392

Liked Posts:

5,654

That's a great article, please post more from that guy.</p>

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #6

Shantz My Pants

New member

Joined:

Dec 10, 2014

Posts:

3,923

Liked Posts:

787

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="EspoForever" data-cid="236147" data-time="1412340175">


I have been saying for 2 years I think Sharp does us much more good off the left half wall than at the point. And if they have a boner for a right shot on the point, the last time I looked, we have this guy named Seabrook that's actually playing his normal position when he's on the point. Ugh.</p></blockquote>

The problem is, you're essentially picking who would you rather have because you can't keep Toews, Kane, Sharp, Shaw, Keith and Seabs on the PP. Shaw needs to stay as he does well in front, and Toews, Keith and Kane obviously do too. So Seabs or Sharp? In all honesty, I think Sharp when playing the Ovechkin role is much better and is more accurate of a shot. He can slide down and is going to bury it. Seabs has a hard shot, but if the puck swings around, I think Sharp is the better passer and has better vision.

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #7

winos5

CCS Donator

Donator

Joined:

Oct 19, 2013

Posts:

7,956

Liked Posts:

829

Location:

Wish You Were Here

It's Q's stache.   It is screening the plays.   Shave that puppy off.</p>

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #8

roshinaya

fnord

Donator

Joined:

May 15, 2010

Posts:

3,533

Liked Posts:

457

Good idea, take Q's stache hostage and he gets to keep it if the PP is well above average.</p>

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #9

Chief Walking Stick

Heeeh heeeeh he said POLES

Donator

Joined:

May 12, 2010

Posts:

45,636

Liked Posts:

29,767

It's because they fired Tallon. Has nothing to do with all the stats and facts presented in that article!!

 

Oct 3, 2014

• #10

EspoForever

New member

Joined:

Jun 4, 2010

Posts:

470

Liked Posts:

0

Location:

North Muskegon, MI

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Trev" data-cid="236151" data-time="1412345360">

The problem is, you're essentially picking who would you rather have because you can't keep Toews, Kane, Sharp, Shaw, Keith and Seabs on the PP. Shaw needs to stay as he does well in front, and Toews, Keith and Kane obviously do too. So Seabs or Sharp? In all honesty, I think Sharp when playing the Ovechkin role is much better and is more accurate of a shot. He can slide down and is going to bury it. Seabs has a hard shot, but if the puck swings around, I think Sharp is the better passer and has better vision.</p></blockquote>

That's what I am saying. Sharp is more dangerous on the off half wall getting one-timers than he is on the point. They blab about him being needed at the point because he's a right shot, which holds no water with Seabrook available.

 

Oct 4, 2014

• #11

Shantz My Pants

New member

Joined:

Dec 10, 2014

Posts:

3,923

Liked Posts:

787

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="EspoForever" data-cid="236182" data-time="1412395935">


That's what I am saying. Sharp is more dangerous on the off half wall getting one-timers than he is on the point. They blab about him being needed at the point because he's a right shot, which holds no water with Seabrook available.</p></blockquote>


They just mean he's the right handed shot to jump down. The only time Sharp really plays the point is on a faceoff. Once the puck drops and we have possession, we go into the umbrella and he's on that half wall like you said.