Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Newcastle Battle Injury Woes Ahead of Tottenham

Blackhawks 7 Canucks 4 - Game 4 Scoring Chances

Penalties, penalty killing and, mostly, stupidity.  That pretty much sums up the reason the Canucks lost on Friday night.  The fans were adamant that something in the arena was "bullshit" for much of the second period and though they were - as they always do, regardless of the actual quality - referring to the "poor" refereeing, the word was much more applicable to some of the actions of their very own hometown heroes.  Shane O'Brien responding to one cross-checking penalty by taking another.  Daniel Sedin responding to his first penalty by cross-checking Kris Versteeg after the whistle and heading to the box for two more.  Alex Burrows cross-checking Dustin Byfuglien in the neck while he was on the ice to put his team down two men - a nice blend of cowardly and stupid on that one.  Kevin Bieksa punching John Madden right after Burrows had been assessed a penalty and before the puck was dropped.  That last play didn't earn Bieksa two minutes in the penalty box but it was illustrative of the Canucks' night in terms of overall discipline: they had very little.  The penalty kill - which has been "rescued" by the return of Ryan Johnson - proceeded to allow four power play goals and the Hawks went into cruise control on their way out of Vancouver, a 3-1 series lead firmly in hand.

Scoring chances and more after the jump.

Star-divide

Scoring Chances

For those who'd like a definition: a scoring chance is defined as a clear play directed toward the opposing net from a dangerous scoring area - loosely defined as the top of the circle in and inside the faceoff dots, though sometimes slightly more generous than that depending on the amount of immediately-preceding puck movement or screens in front of the net.  Blocked shots are generally not included but missed shots are.  A player is awarded a scoring chance anytime he is on the ice and someone from either team has a chance to score.  He is awarded a "chance for" if someone on his team has a chance to score and a "chance against" if the opposing team has a chance to score.  And, of course, a big thanks to Vic Ferrari for making the whole damn thing possible with his awesome script.

Chi-van_game_4_part_1_medium

Chi-van_game_4_part_3_medium

The play was about even when the teams were at even strength.  If anything, Vancouver should have been much further ahead, especially in the second period where they spent a lot of time getting good shots blocked and taking bad shots in the first half of the period.  The team's +30 Corsi and +16 Fenwick at even strength are indicative of this territorial advantage.  Usually with a territorial advantage like that you would expect to generate more scoring chances and more power plays than the opposition.  Instead, the Blackhawks took four minors compared to eight for the Canucks which no doubt turned the game in Chicago's favour.  The fact that Vancouver couldn't kill off any of the penalties didn't help either.

Chi-van_game_4_part_2a_medium

Chi-van_game_4_part_2b_medium

Duncan Keith and Brent Seabrook have gotten a lot of positive press in this series but really haven't been all that dominant.  Either that, or I was being really spoiled with Drew Doughty previously (I know it's a pretty small sample of games but after watching the Olympics and the playoffs, I wouldn't be at all upset if Doughty won the Norris this year, given the other two guys in the running).  The other defenders are clearly a step down from these two, but they both have their struggles at evens, especially if the puck starts cycling around. 

John Madden has been an interesting guy to watch in this series.  He's basically the fourth line center who plays both with and against chaff and so far hasn't done all that well.  I've got to think that one of the places that this team is going to save some money in the off-season is by letting Madden go and while it will hurt the depth a bit, he really hasn't been an important cog, at least while I've been watching.

Yahweh's Redeemed Wife

3. Michael Grabner - He was on a very effective line with Kyle Wellwood and Mikael Samuelsson that didn't really have any specific match-up but managed to generate chances against virtually everybody.  In addition to the big lead in chances, Grabner and Samuelsson also tied for the team lead in Fenwick differential (+11) which suggests that they were one of the few lines getting chances out of their territoiral advantage.  It's my opinion that their failure to score in this game was more bad luck than anything else, especially since Antti Niemi wasn't really at the top of his game.

2. Dustin Byfuglien - Another big game for Byfuglien.  I blamed the Canucks for taking all of the penalties but Byfuglien deserves a lot of credit for drawing three of them, all on cross-checks.  The Canucks obviously emphasized making life difficult for Byfuglien and although I'm sure the game was much less pleasant from a personal perspective, Byfuglien did an awful lot to help his team win.  In addition to the three drawn penalties and the one official assist, he was also a force in front of the net on a dominant Hawks power play.

1. Jonathan Toews - A hat trick with two assists along for the ride.  Toews was a force on the power play and pretty good at even strength too (his -1 Fenwick total was second best on the team).  In a game that came down to results on the power play, Toews was a primary driver of those results.

The Barren and Desolate Woman

3. Shane O'Brien - I don't know if he deserves to be here or if it's the coaching staff.  I believe that he was coached to play physically with Byfuglien but two penalties in the first period probably wasn't what they had in mind.  O'Brien seems to have trouble finding a sweet spot between physically ineffective and overly aggressive.  He was mostly the latter in his 9:38 of ice time on Friday night.

2. Roberto Luongo - Six goals is a lot.  As I said above, neither goalie was all that good in this game but Luongo in particular needs to be better.  He wasn't getting a lot of help in front of the net which I'm sure is frustrating for him but the Canucks just aren't going to win games until he starts letting in fewer than three goals, something that hasn't happened in any of the last three contests.

1. Alex Burrows - A really stupid penalty for the second game in a row, I was shocked to see that nhl.com made Burrows the third star.  With his team down two goals he takes an obvious cross-checking penalty and does so in a way that shows no decency toward his opponent.  Cross-checks to the head ought to be penalized harshly, though Burrows didn't hit Byfuglien flush and Byfuglien wasn't injured and it's the playoffs after all, so his malicious intent escaped further punishment.  Well, except for the goal that put the Canucks down by three.  If I had one Alex Burrows related wish, it would be to put Alex Burrows in a Hilary Duff style PSA with Mike Comrie who would lecture him about using offensive language on the ice.  Comedic gold.

Comment 13 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Canucks really came undone in this one. Would have been embarrassing to their fans if they weren’t so busy blaming the refs.

I thought the Hawks were horrible in this game, yet won in a laugher because of Vancouver’s even more dreadful performance.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 11, 2010 9:04 AM MDT reply actions  

That does pretty much sum things up Bruce. The Hawks were legitimately good on the power play, but other than that, they didn’t play very well and spent a tonne of time in their own zone.

by Scott Reynolds on May 11, 2010 9:06 AM MDT up reply actions  

The Canucks were simply bad in game 4. Very undisciplined and deserved to lose. I think most fans realized that they deserved to lose that game. Not many were blaming the refs. A lot were blaming the poor discipline and the PK, and rightfully so.

by SJKel on May 11, 2010 12:37 PM MDT up reply actions  

I should think so. The Canucks themselves were blaming their lack of discipline and to their credit were much better in that regard in G5. Tonight should be interesting in that regard since we’ll see noted penalty-takers O’Brien and Alberts playing a larger role (although they were again fine in G5).

by Scott Reynolds on May 11, 2010 4:26 PM MDT up reply actions  

Luongo’s even strength save percentage is .931, 2nd best in the playoffs behind Ryan Miller.

His PK save percentage is .774, unshockingly the worst of any goaltender in the playoffs.

by Double DD on May 11, 2010 10:40 AM MDT reply actions  

It has been an odd spread. I think some of it is on Luongo and some of it on the rest of the Canucks’ inability to clear the front of the net. They were struggling down low against Los Angeles and it sure hasn’t improved against Chicago.

by Scott Reynolds on May 11, 2010 10:48 AM MDT up reply actions  

When Luongo was bad like in game 4, he gave up a lot of rebounds. Those rebounds tend to become shots much more easily during opponent power plays, and therefore his shorthanded save percentage is terrible.

by SJKel on May 11, 2010 12:39 PM MDT up reply actions  

Nice to see an interpretation of SH Sv% that invokes neither luck nor irrelevance. You may be on to something that poor rebound control might be costlier when a man short. It would be interesting to see if some of the advanced statistics on rebounds have been further broken down by special teams, but it seems a reasonable hypothesis to me.

That said, rebound control is itself a team function, even if the goalie tends to get all the credit/blame. Defence is a team game, always.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 11, 2010 1:59 PM MDT up reply actions  

That said, rebound control is itself a team function, even if the goalie tends to get all the credit/blame. Defence is a team game, always.

I wonder about that point too. I definitely agree defence is a team game. I think how often a rebound becomes a goal is more of a team function. I think how often a shot-on-goal becomes a rebound is less of a team function, but I wonder how much of it is related to the goalie and how much of it related to the shooter. I do agree that goalies typically get all the credit/blame on rebounds. I remember Luongo said something like he’s not completely in control when it comes to rebounds.

by SJKel on May 11, 2010 3:02 PM MDT up reply actions  

Of the 6 (six) rebound goals scored in the two games in Vancouver, I’d put the primary blame on the defence on about half of them. e.g. Kopecky’s goal, where the D allowed Hossa a good shot at close range, and left Kopecky all alone to pick up and deposit the rebound. Luongo did about as well as he could stopping the first one, but had no help at all in clearing the rebound or the man. To me that’s on the team, not the goalie. Whereas ones like Byfuglien’s first, where Luongo was unable to corral Keith’s waist-high shot and dropped it onto his own doorstep, well that one’s on the goalie.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 11, 2010 5:44 PM MDT up reply actions  

We’ve all been around the same bit of the internet so long that we’ve all heard each others stories already, but I’ll repeat this one.

When I was a kid, playing hockey in small town Alberta, we had what we called house league and a rep team. The latter travelled about to neighbouring towns. It’s the same group of kids all the way through from fourth grade, and at some point (midget I think, maybe last year of bantam for some) testosterone kicks in and everyone becomes a complete asshole. For me, this manifested itself in blaming everything on the goalie. It really is a heartbreaker when you bust your ass all game to get the better of the play, and show up for the monumentally stupid small town 6:00 am practises, just to see the goalie let a couple easy ones drift by him when it matters. I ragged on that effer, and really he was probably a pretty good goalie, I’d feel terrible if I saw him today.

My coach decided he’d teach me a lesson by playing me in goal in house league … and I was fucking awesome. If it happened now it wouldn’t go to my head, teenage boys are different beasts though. I played another and was damn good. Then every bugger decided they deserved a shot at playing goal, and I decided I should start playing net for the rep team. That coach (he was an ex-AHLer who played a bit in the NHL, can’t remember his name, shitty coach though) had opened a tin of worms. Overwhelming concesus on the team was that I should play goal in the next tournament. So I got my wish, and it didn’t end well.

Fuckers love you when you win and hate you when you lose, man. It’s no wonder most goalies are nuts. That’s a tough gig. No wonder they convince themselves of mad things. Every 20 seconds, Kelly Hrudey describes something that can’t possibly happen in our universe. And the overwhelming majority of Canadian hockey fans nod their heads in unison.

I remember a couple of years ago talking to a goalie/oilogosphere commenter via email. He’s an interesting guy, and clearly a bright guy, but I stopped responding after an email that basically spoke of time travel. A “when I’m in the zone” tale. Thing is, he could post that on a fan messageboard and 99% of the readers there would agree with him. Maybe that’s because people like to believe in magic, or at the very least that verything-happens-for-a-reason-and-can-be-explained. And maybe it’s better that they continue to believe that, I dunno.

The rebound thing kills me, though. Sometimes goalies eff up on a floater, but otherwise rebounds are the result of the shooter. Nobody is trying to hit square on the knee, or the edge of the pad or bottom bit of the blocker, they’re trying to score. If you miss net and hit a meaty part of the goalie though, well you’ve got another crack at it, just need the hockey gods to send the puck back yur way. They don’t always oblige.

by Vic Ferrari on May 12, 2010 5:51 PM MDT up reply actions  

It’s not just the hockey gods. Don’t you think the goalie has some control over where the rebound goes? Not always, sometimes it’s all he can do to stop the first shot, but an experienced goalie will direct many rebounds in directions that won’t hurt him. Whereas a guy like JDD who punts greasy rebounds out into the slot all too often will be less successful.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on May 16, 2010 12:02 AM MDT up reply actions  

Shit happens. Maybe next year it’s the opposite.

by Vic Ferrari on May 12, 2010 5:09 PM MDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Edmonton Oilers community.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Dukeriver2_small
A Narrative Revisited: Hemsky 83

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Northwest Standings

GP W L OTL PT
Vancouver 53 33 15 5 71
Minnesota 53 25 20 8 58
Colorado 55 27 25 3 57
Calgary 53 24 22 7 55
Edmonton 53 21 27 5 47

(updated 2.8.2012 at 7:10 AM MST)

21 - 27 - 5

Lost 1

Clear Victory Standings

Western Conference

  1. Detroit Red Wings (22-7, .759)
  2. San Jose Sharks (13-5, .722)
  3. Vancouver Canucks (17-7, .708)
  4. St. Louis Blues (12-6, .667)
  5. Chicago Blackhawks (16-12, .571)
  6. Los Angeles Kings (10-9, .526)
  7. Nashville Predators (11-10, .524)
  8. Phoenix Coyotes (12-12, .500)
  9. Dallas Stars (11-15, .423)
  10. Edmonton Oilers (11-15, .423)
  11. Anaheim Ducks (10-14, .417)
  12. Colorado Avalanche (9-13, .409)
  13. Calgary Flames (9-15, .375)
  14. Minnesota Wild (7-13,.350)
  15. Columbus Blue Jackets (5-19, .208)

Eastern Conference

  1. Boston Bruins (21-3, .875)
  2. New York Rangers (18-8, .692)
  3. Pittsburgh Penguins (16-9, .640)
  4. Philadelphia Flyers (14-11, .560)
  5. Toronto Maple Leafs (14-12, .538)
  6. Washington Capitals (14-13, .519)
  7. Montreal Canadiens (11-11, .500)
  8. New Jersey Devils (10-12, .455)
  9. Ottawa Senators (10-13, .435)
  10. Winnipeg Jets (10-14, .417)
  11. Carolina Hurricanes (9-13, .409)
  12. Florida Panthers (7-12, .368)
  13. Buffalo Sabres (7-14, .333)
  14. Tampa Bay Lightning (9-20, .310)
  15. New York Islanders (6-14, .300)

Division Standings

  1. Central (51-39, .567)
  2. Northeast (49-39, .557)
  3. Atlantic (45-37, .549)
  4. Pacific (37-36, .507)
  5. Northwest (34-44, .436)
  6. Southeast (33-54, .379)


Managing Editor

Kurri_small Derek Zona

Laraque_horcoff_250x360_small Scott Reynolds

Columnists

Batman_small ryanbatty

0615pisani_small dawgbone98

Okc_shoulder_small Eric Rodgers

Neal_small Neal Livingston

Mike_small Mike Wntrz

Contributors

Newtwitter2_small Jonathan Willis

Mccurdycloseup_small Bruce McCurdy

Esaandstanley_small Benjamin Massey

Me_smyth_bobblehead3__1_of_1__small Lisa McRitchie

Small Triumph44

Gyi0062208469-bobrovsky_small Chase W

Small JaredL