Minnesota Wild: The Reason Behind the Scoring Woes
As we all watch the 1-8-1 free-fall continue after the All-Star break, it’s getting harder to put a finger on the specific troubles of the Minnesota Wild. To say it’s all because of lack of scoring seems to be a big red herring for something that might be more at the root of the issue.
There’s a lot of reasons for the lack of scoring, and it isn’t all just not enough shots or enough chances. After Tuesday’s game in Brooklyn where the Wild gave up five goals to include one 42 seconds after the game tying by Jason Pominville , and Thursday’s game which was lost by a turnover late in the 3rd period to the Rangers at MSG you have to ask is it just the scoring that is letting the team down? When you drill it down you can find there’s somethings under the surface that might be plaguing the team.
People will be quick to point to Mike Yeo and his defense first as the core of the system issues. You could make that argument, but it seems a little naïve as the Wild are averaging 29 shots a game over this bad nine game stretch, and generated 43 shots on goals against the Islanders. It’s obvious that the team is generating scoring chances right?
That’s where some close examination of the shot total shows something might be lacking in the quality department. In the Islanders game only 22 of the 43 shots were considered scoring chances, and of those 22 scoring chances according to War on Ice.com only eight of them were considered “High Danger” scoring chances. That says to me that the players are shooting, but are they getting into the places where they can generate scoring chances?
In other words, are the Wild shooting the puck from the slot and center of the ice where the percentage shot is better because of the look at the goal? Are they getting in front of the net for rebounds and deflections? Something says to me it might be a positioning and movement issue. If you’re shooting that’s good, but you’ve got to do it from high percentage areas if you want to score.
More from Editorials
- Another Stanley Cup Final comes with the Minnesota Wild watching. When will that change?
- Story remains the same: Minnesota Wild flame out in first round
- Believe it or not: Minnesota Wild backs are against the wall, again
- The Minnesota Wild are in the postseason again. Is this the year they can make a run?
- Wild vs. Kings: Where does Minnesota go from here?
I’d say the Wild are having issues getting to those high scoring areas for two reasons. One is the coaching staff is not encouraging or restricting them from making the moves to get to those spots in the offensive zone. Two is that the players are not doing the small things to get to those scoring areas, and are just shooting the puck to try just to try to start something.
So to tie it all together the idea that the Minnesota Wild are being let down because of scoring is a little misleading. The lack of scoring is only a result, and that comes from a lack of scoring chances and moreover of good scoring chances. In hockey the best way to generate scoring chances is through hustle and positioning. Ask Charlie Coyle why he’s been a hot scorer while the rest of the team is floundering, he’s been making goals through hard-nosed plays and going to the net.
Additionally it’s worth mentioning that the hustle and fight for position needs to continue for the entire game. On Thursday the Rangers did not score the go-ahead 5:46 to go in the game. This is a common story for the Wild breakdowns, lack of hustle, and turnovers lead to a late loss. That needs to change, that’s not how you win hockey games.
Hopefully Mike Yeo and his assistants are thinking of new ways to get the forwards into position to not only shoot, but get a scoring chance. Also the players are sitting down trying to figure out how they can get to those scoring chance generating spots on the ice. The players and the coaches both have been around hockey long enough to know where the scoring areas are. They need to get there and fast, or they might not be going to the playoffs. It’s that simple.