Game Discussion Thread Buffalo at Saint Louis, December 10, 2017, 7pm (MSG)

[LikeEich]

Eichel is severely immature... much more so than you'd expect from an average 21 year old. His body language, post game interviews, etc... is what you would expect from a 15-16 year old. He has a lot of growing up to do.

Pretty much this. Might have been easier to get him to work on his attitude efore paying him like a responsible adult. But he will be worth the 10M

[Sabel79]

cosset  [kos-it] verb (used with object)  1. to treat as a pet; pamper; coddle.

 

Welp, I learned a new word today.

From a post with an awful typo, even....

[pi2000]

So.. I've watched the video a few times.

 

Yes, I think I agree that Kane should move over to take away the direct path to the goaltender.  Eichel is clearly playing to take away the cutback and the pass back,.

 

At the start of the breakout the Eichel plays the pass from Tarasenko to Stastny.  Eichel knows he has two behind him in coverage.  This should immediately mean that the first two guys up the ice are picked up by Kane and Risto.

 

Kane is angling towards Stastny on the wall and Eichel is correctly between Tarasenko and Stastny.  As Stastny crosses the ice and Tarasenko transitions up the wall Jack stays in perfect position to keep the pass to Stastny from being made.  Kane has to know that Ristolainen will have Stastny now that he's moving to his side of the ice.  Kane's ONLY focus at that point has to be picking up Tarasenko as he moves around Eichel.

 

As Eichel moves past Stastny he moves his stick even more behind him to prevent the cross ice pass to Stastny.  This is a CLEAR indication he does NOT have Tarasenko (nor should he).  As Tarasenko moves past Eichel, Eichel keeps his stick back.  If he's taking Tarasenko then he'd move his stick up into a poke check position.

 

As they cross the red-line Kane, inexplicably moves toward the center of the ice.  That's the green light at that point for Tarasenko and now Jack knows that Tarasenko has a path into the zone (even though he shouldn't).

 

The only thing that comes into play, and we can't hear it, is any communication from Kane to Eichel.

 

Oh well, a great player forced a defensive coverage screw up.  

 

You always play man to man in 3-on-3... Tarasenko was Eichel's responsibility.... poor gap control combined with late recognition and Eichel was doomed.

Pretty much this. Might have been easier to get him to work on his attitude efore paying him like a responsible adult. But he will be worth the 10M

 

Yeah, I think he'll get there but it might be a few more years before he improves his emotional maturity... maybe then he'll finally get the captaincy.   

[LikeEich]

You always play man to man in 3-on-3... Tarasenko was Eichel's responsibility.... poor gap control combined with late recognition and Eichel was doomed.

 

 

Yeah, I think he'll get there but it might be a few more years before he improves his emotional maturity... maybe then he'll finally get the captaincy.

I agree. Once he learns how to channel that extreme hate for losing, I think his attitude and overall game could improve. Hopefully it's sooner rather then never but who knows

[Thorny]

Eichel is severely immature... much more so than you'd expect from an average 21 year old.    His body language, post game interviews, etc...  is what you would expect from a 15-16 year old.    He has a lot of growing up to do.

 

Ya, that's what I said. He's a kid.

[Weave]

Maybe he'd have been better off playing in a pro league in European instead of his cosseted stint in college... might have toughened him up...

 

Boom.

[Doohickie]

From a post with an awful typo, even....

 

I don't even notice those anymore.  Unless it's the wrong there/they're/their.  That one still pisses me off.

maybe then he'll finally get the captaincy.   

 

If he can wrest it from Mittelstadt, you mean.  :flirt:

[LTS]

You always play man to man in 3-on-3... Tarasenko was Eichel's responsibility.... poor gap control combined with late recognition and Eichel was doomed.

 

Yeah, I think he'll get there but it might be a few more years before he improves his emotional maturity... maybe then he'll finally get the captaincy.   

 

Based on your statement, you believe Kane has the Blues defender then?

 

Ristolainen picks up Stastny crossing the ice onto his side.

Kane is at the Sabres blue line

Eichel is at the red line.

 

The Blues defender is at the Blues blue line

Tarasenko is crossing the red line.

 

You are basically saying that Kane does not pick up Tarasenko but instead, despite being the DEEPEST defender on the ice for the Sabres he should stay at the blue line and pick up the Blues defender?

 

I completely disagree with you.  Until the Blues defender enters the play it's a 2 on 3.  Eichel's job is to reduce Tarasenko's ice so Kane can cover him easier.  Kane's job is to make sure he does not get beat because lo and behold... he is the last defender.

 

Eichel's job as the high defender is to pick up the Blues defense.  Moreover, you want Eichel higher in the zone because he's more likely to beat the Blues player 1 on 1 should Kane or Ristolainen cause a turnover.

 

It's man to man.. but Kane was the man.

[MattPie]

Based on your statement, you believe Kane has the Blues defender then?

 

Ristolainen picks up Stastny crossing the ice onto his side.

Kane is at the Sabres blue line

Eichel is at the red line.

 

The Blues defender is at the Blues blue line

Tarasenko is crossing the red line.

 

You are basically saying that Kane does not pick up Tarasenko but instead, despite being the DEEPEST defender on the ice for the Sabres he should stay at the blue line and pick up the Blues defender?

 

I completely disagree with you.  Until the Blues defender enters the play it's a 2 on 3.  Eichel's job is to reduce Tarasenko's ice so Kane can cover him easier.  Kane's job is to make sure he does not get beat because lo and behold... he is the last defender.

 

Eichel's job as the high defender is to pick up the Blues defense.  Moreover, you want Eichel higher in the zone because he's more likely to beat the Blues player 1 on 1 should Kane or Ristolainen cause a turnover.

 

It's man to man.. but Kane was the man.

 

It's definitely man-to-man in the D zone, but as you point out, I'm not sure you do that in transition. It makes sense that the high defender takes the D, AND that high defender should be the guy that'll blow by the opponents' last guy back.

Edited December 12, 2017 by MattiPaj