BTW, a couple of facts for whoever is taking shots at Dave:
1. We repeatedly asked him to come. He never came saying he was going to be the savior or anything. He simply wanted to help us win.
2. Dave had readily admitted it was not easy coming to the tournament without any practice. He himself said that next year we should have Tony practice all year so he can play net next time. Dave is willing to simply play D.
3. Dave was NOT the reason we lost. He played OK. Wasn't as good as last year, but definitely didn't lose it for us. If anyone disagrees, go back and watch the video. A couple of goals I'm sure he'd want back, but there were also a number of nice saves.
the problem with that is that the other teams are better then us. So any goalie we train will only be as good as us and may not be good enough verse other teams.
Tony has been playing in lawrence though so that should be good for him
I think there's two concepts we have to distinguish: Individually we're pretty good. As a team, we're lousy.
To give an example, let's take the person who might be the best player on the best team in the tourney: Bobby Housser, who plays on the Assassins, who won the C division (he's also the son of the person that puts the tourney together). I do not think that if we had him on our team that we win any of the games that we lost. Nor do I think that if me, Borges, Brett, etc went onto the Assasins that they'd be any worse off. Similarly, if he came to play with us in Saugus I don't think that he runs circles around everybody. The point is, individually he might be skilled, but there isn't a chasm of skill between him and everyone else. That's why individually I don't think we're as bad as the results would indicate. The same holds true for goaltending: with the exception of the Lightning's goalie, I didn't see any dominant goaltenders.
Yet, if you watch how they play together, these players get put in positions where their skills can shine. As a group they move without the puck. The puck carrier always knows where he's going with the puck. They are able to work the points, hold the puck until teammates get open, and transition the puck effectively.
Last year from playing a scrambly style of defense, and some very good goaltending we were able to use our skill to take advantage of breakdowns. Yet that skill can only carry us so far: we need to play better as a team.
So talk about adding players like Eric, Scotty, Ron, Billy, etc is great, but that will only get us so far. This time we need a couple of us to get together and break down from the video what the other teams did - and implement something similar (I have some ideas already). Once we know how we want to play, we have to practice that style of play as a team.
As an outsider looking in you just need to play more together.
Also playing against other guys would most likely be helpful because when you play with and against the same guys you get used to each other and you level off talent wise.
John's point of plugging people in is exactly correct. Look at how many pro teams go out and spend all kinds of money, but the players don't gell and they end up being a waste.
You need to put players in positions that allow them to make plays.
Someone made a comment about some defensman always pinching in. Having a defenseman that pinches in is great if timed correctly and if a forward falls back. If your team doesn't want a pinching defenseman, then you need to bring a defenseman that doesn't pinch.
If every player has the same weaknesses then you'll end up being frustrated at every tourney you play.
The other thing is growing up as a witness even though you grow up playing sports you don't ever get coached.
Sometimes getting coached is hard if you have never been coached especially if you're getting advice from a fellow team member because the tendancy is to immediately think, "who is he to be telling me how to play?"
From what I read you had a C's and A's. Those should be chosen by the base team and done by secret ballot or something that way eveyone feels like they had a say and no one can argue with what the majority said.
All the anonymous post show that there were some very unhappy people or person in the tourney and decisions that were made. That is going to happen, but posting anonymously is like a pro player going to a newspaper.
You want team unity you better get it here / now because if you don't you'll never get it while you're playing.
Unity isn't tested when you're winning. Player weaknesses are highlighted when you're winning. It's tested when you're loosing or lost.
I know you didn't ask for my 2cents, but I was bored at work so I gave it.
we all know that there are certain players that can't humble themselves to listen to their peers.
Dale(worst case), and I think I also have that complex to a degree. I've been the best at D most my life, and to have to listen to someone that's below my talent, would be hard for me and most everyone else to accept. You question their knowledge of the sport, position, their talent. it's natural.
For example:
Johnny tells me how to shoot. Johnny doesn't have a hard shot. Does it make sense to take his advice?
Let's say brendan was picked to be captain. Do enough people respect him enough to listen to him?
It'll be harder than you think to name a captain that everyone feels mutual about. They have to lead by example, know the game and every aspect, and know when to give someone a kick in the butt or a pat on the back. Age doesn't guaranty that they know what should be done in certain situations.
Bob plays different than i do on D. it'd be wrong for him to tell me to clear the net. But maybe to tell me to rush the puck more often would be helpful, or that i'm rushing to much. But Bob has some crazy ideas on how to play, and we all experienced it. Just does to show someone who has played for a long time isn't always the best choice
I'll listen to who ever as long as everyone is on board because when people stay on forever it gets very aggrivating.
The only position that is hard for is center because we really only have a few true centers (John R, John B, & Jared) no offense to everyone else or some of the names I've seen throw around that I don't know. So one team usually only has one true center. Mike P definately has the legs & stamina for it.
If you're trying to prep players prepping another true center would probably do you guys some good.
If Brendon or anyone else was picked by majority vote then that would show that enough people respect him / that person or feel he is the right person for the job.
It's usuallly easier for someone else to see where the mechanics of shot are off. look at Caddy's. They'll tell their golfer when they see a bad mechanic tendancy, but that doesn't mean that they hit the ball better. Know what I mean?
I'll use myself as an example. During warm ups Brett (which I didn't know at that point) randomly said, "keep the ball closer" he actually said it on 3 different instances when I was shooting before I realized he was even talking to me. I didn't know him from a whole in the wall, but it made me pay attention to it.
If you really think about it we all coach each other during the game.
Listen to all the yelling that goes on. "Look up" "shoot" "Pinch in" "Pass" "Get off"
So it goes on, but sounds like you just want it more organized.
I think there's two types of coaching involved here.
One is a coach that makes sure a team sticks to a style of play. They can design the "X's and O's" of a system to play. It wouldn't be a bad idea when it comes to FL or other tourneys to actually get a real coach to watch us play against a different team, or look at video footage and try to teach us how to play.
Of course, other teams have full-time coaches. We're not going to be able to hire a full-time coach. In that regard I think our captain / assistants have to take a more vocal role. But, as was said, they have to be someone the other players can listen to (and our guys are not very coachable). That's why it would take two or three people who are on the same page to impress the style of play on the others.
Also included in that would be letting people know when they are either not trying hard enough, or are making mistakes in their decision making.
The second element of coaching can be done by anyone: helping people work on specific things. Using Brett's example, even if I didn't have a hard shot, I still COULD try to coach somebody on taking a slap shot. My problem is, I still haven't figured it out the mechanics yet. So in that regard, I couldn't effectively coach, or teach somebody how to take one. Yet, there are other areas that I could coach people in. The same holds true with anyone: if you can teach somebody a specific skill, then work with them on it. As the person trying to learn on the other hand, it doesn't hurt to get a second opinion if you don't feel you're being taught the right way.
Finally, in regard to having a line "coach" in Saugus when we play pickup games, I don't know if it's really necessary (preparation for a tourney is another discussion). Whoever the captains of the teams are, they should be able to tell people if they've been on too long. As far as I know, there's really only two people who aren't always good at subbing out - one of them we've mentioned, and the other is myself. For me it's a matter of not usually having another Center (also, when I'm out there for a long time I try to make sure my play doesn't get lazy defensively). If anyone were to feel I'm not subbing fairly though, they can always feel free to call me off (well except Brett - I can't listen to a Canadiens fan).
11 comments:
BTW, a couple of facts for whoever is taking shots at Dave:
1. We repeatedly asked him to come. He never came saying he was going to be the savior or anything. He simply wanted to help us win.
2. Dave had readily admitted it was not easy coming to the tournament without any practice. He himself said that next year we should have Tony practice all year so he can play net next time. Dave is willing to simply play D.
3. Dave was NOT the reason we lost. He played OK. Wasn't as good as last year, but definitely didn't lose it for us. If anyone disagrees, go back and watch the video. A couple of goals I'm sure he'd want back, but there were also a number of nice saves.
the problem with that is that the other teams are better then us. So any goalie we train will only be as good as us and may not be good enough verse other teams.
Tony has been playing in lawrence though so that should be good for him
I think there's two concepts we have to distinguish: Individually we're pretty good. As a team, we're lousy.
To give an example, let's take the person who might be the best player on the best team in the tourney: Bobby Housser, who plays on the Assassins, who won the C division (he's also the son of the person that puts the tourney together). I do not think that if we had him on our team that we win any of the games that we lost. Nor do I think that if me, Borges, Brett, etc went onto the Assasins that they'd be any worse off. Similarly, if he came to play with us in Saugus I don't think that he runs circles around everybody. The point is, individually he might be skilled, but there isn't a chasm of skill between him and everyone else. That's why individually I don't think we're as bad as the results would indicate. The same holds true for goaltending: with the exception of the Lightning's goalie, I didn't see any dominant goaltenders.
Yet, if you watch how they play together, these players get put in positions where their skills can shine. As a group they move without the puck. The puck carrier always knows where he's going with the puck. They are able to work the points, hold the puck until teammates get open, and transition the puck effectively.
Last year from playing a scrambly style of defense, and some very good goaltending we were able to use our skill to take advantage of breakdowns. Yet that skill can only carry us so far: we need to play better as a team.
So talk about adding players like Eric, Scotty, Ron, Billy, etc is great, but that will only get us so far. This time we need a couple of us to get together and break down from the video what the other teams did - and implement something similar (I have some ideas already). Once we know how we want to play, we have to practice that style of play as a team.
As an outsider looking in you just need to play more together.
Also playing against other guys would most likely be helpful because when you play with and against the same guys you get used to each other and you level off talent wise.
John's point of plugging people in is exactly correct.
Look at how many pro teams go out and spend all kinds of money, but the players don't gell and they end up being a waste.
You need to put players in positions that allow them to make plays.
Someone made a comment about some defensman always pinching in.
Having a defenseman that pinches in is great if timed correctly and if a forward falls back.
If your team doesn't want a pinching defenseman, then you need to bring a defenseman that doesn't pinch.
If every player has the same weaknesses then you'll end up being frustrated at every tourney you play.
The other thing is growing up as a witness even though you grow up playing sports you don't ever get coached.
Sometimes getting coached is hard if you have never been coached especially if you're getting advice from a fellow team member because the tendancy is to immediately think, "who is he to be telling me how to play?"
From what I read you had a C's and A's.
Those should be chosen by the base team and done by secret ballot or something that way eveyone feels like they had a say and no one can argue with what the majority said.
All the anonymous post show that there were some very unhappy people or person in the tourney and decisions that were made.
That is going to happen, but posting anonymously is like a pro player going to a newspaper.
You want team unity you better get it here / now because if you don't you'll never get it while you're playing.
Unity isn't tested when you're winning. Player weaknesses are highlighted when you're winning. It's tested when you're loosing or lost.
I know you didn't ask for my 2cents, but I was bored at work so I gave it.
No problem Mike, feel free to post anytime you like.
i vote for me
we all know that there are certain players that can't humble themselves to listen to their peers.
Dale(worst case), and I think I also have that complex to a degree. I've been the best at D most my life, and to have to listen to someone that's below my talent, would be hard for me and most everyone else to accept. You question their knowledge of the sport, position, their talent. it's natural.
For example:
Johnny tells me how to shoot.
Johnny doesn't have a hard shot.
Does it make sense to take his advice?
Let's say brendan was picked to be captain. Do enough people respect him enough to listen to him?
It'll be harder than you think to name a captain that everyone feels mutual about. They have to lead by example, know the game and every aspect, and know when to give someone a kick in the butt or a pat on the back. Age doesn't guaranty that they know what should be done in certain situations.
Bob plays different than i do on D. it'd be wrong for him to tell me to clear the net. But maybe to tell me to rush the puck more often would be helpful, or that i'm rushing to much. But Bob has some crazy ideas on how to play, and we all experienced it. Just does to show someone who has played for a long time isn't always the best choice
I'll listen to who ever as long as everyone is on board because when people stay on forever it gets very aggrivating.
The only position that is hard for is center because we really only have a few true centers (John R, John B, & Jared) no offense to everyone else or some of the names I've seen throw around that I don't know. So one team usually only has one true center. Mike P definately has the legs & stamina for it.
If you're trying to prep players prepping another true center would probably do you guys some good.
Jared can't be an option, seeing as his motto down in FL was "ICE TIME"!
If Brendon or anyone else was picked by majority vote then that would show that enough people respect him / that person or feel he is the right person for the job.
It's usuallly easier for someone else to see where the mechanics of shot are off.
look at Caddy's. They'll tell their golfer when they see a bad mechanic tendancy, but that doesn't mean that they hit the ball better. Know what I mean?
I'll use myself as an example.
During warm ups Brett (which I didn't know at that point) randomly said, "keep the ball closer" he actually said it on 3 different instances when I was shooting before I realized he was even talking to me. I didn't know him from a whole in the wall, but it made me pay attention to it.
If you really think about it we all coach each other during the game.
Listen to all the yelling that goes on.
"Look up"
"shoot"
"Pinch in"
"Pass"
"Get off"
So it goes on, but sounds like you just want it more organized.
I think there's two types of coaching involved here.
One is a coach that makes sure a team sticks to a style of play. They can design the "X's and O's" of a system to play. It wouldn't be a bad idea when it comes to FL or other tourneys to actually get a real coach to watch us play against a different team, or look at video footage and try to teach us how to play.
Of course, other teams have full-time coaches. We're not going to be able to hire a full-time coach. In that regard I think our captain / assistants have to take a more vocal role. But, as was said, they have to be someone the other players can listen to (and our guys are not very coachable). That's why it would take two or three people who are on the same page to impress the style of play on the others.
Also included in that would be letting people know when they are either not trying hard enough, or are making mistakes in their decision making.
The second element of coaching can be done by anyone: helping people work on specific things. Using Brett's example, even if I didn't have a hard shot, I still COULD try to coach somebody on taking a slap shot. My problem is, I still haven't figured it out the mechanics yet. So in that regard, I couldn't effectively coach, or teach somebody how to take one. Yet, there are other areas that I could coach people in. The same holds true with anyone: if you can teach somebody a specific skill, then work with them on it. As the person trying to learn on the other hand, it doesn't hurt to get a second opinion if you don't feel you're being taught the right way.
Finally, in regard to having a line "coach" in Saugus when we play pickup games, I don't know if it's really necessary (preparation for a tourney is another discussion). Whoever the captains of the teams are, they should be able to tell people if they've been on too long. As far as I know, there's really only two people who aren't always good at subbing out - one of them we've mentioned, and the other is myself. For me it's a matter of not usually having another Center (also, when I'm out there for a long time I try to make sure my play doesn't get lazy defensively). If anyone were to feel I'm not subbing fairly though, they can always feel free to call me off (well except Brett - I can't listen to a Canadiens fan).
Post a Comment