Flyers 4 Blackhawks 3 - Game 3 Scoring Chances
There is nothing quite like playoff overtime. Whenever I see overtime in football or international hockey, I dread the shootout throughout. The ultimate resolution in the biggest game being something completely different from the game itself. It's rather unsatisfying, though given this particular Flyers' team, I'm sure some fans will disagree. At any rate, in the NHL playoffs the team game stays that way throughout and those guys will damn well play until someone scores a fucking goal. It's awesome. Some of my very best memories of hockey fandom come from playoff overtime. Buchberger sealing the 4-3 comeback over Dallas in '97. Cujo and Marchant in Game Seven that same year. Roloson on Cheechoo in '06. "Time to kill now."
Last night it was Claude Giroux's moment and even though it's not my moment, it will be an important time of joy in the collective memory of thousands of Flyers' fans for as long as they care to remember. For the fans in Chicago, if the Hawks lose this series, they won't be able to help but remember. You can want to forget... but you can't. It just lives on and on. And it will live on for Joel Quenneville the most. He's the man that ordered the change if that Bolland line didn't get the right matchup. He likely didn't intend for them to come off as the Flyers rushed the puck up the ice after winning the draw but that's exactly what Kris Versteeg and Tomas Kopecky did, the buffoons. Six perfect passes and it was in the back of the net.
Scoring chances and more after the jump.
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 scripts.
After one game I was surprised. And then I was surprised again. And now I've been surprised for a third time. For three consecutive games, the Flyers have outchanced the Blackhawks by a 4:3 margin or better. For three consecutive games the Flyers haven't looked out of place. In fact, for three consecutive games, the Flyers have been the better team everywhere except between the pipes. And last night, they even managed to win the game! Patrick Kane's goal to open the third period could have been a dagger to the heart but the goal seemed to instead give the Flyers new life. After responding with a goal of their own, the Flyers prevented Chicago from generating a single dangerous shot that actually required a save from Michael Leighton. Ridiculous. On top of that, they generated a bunch of chances themselves - the puck does need to be somewhere after all - and eventually capitalized by scoring in overtime. And when that was disallowed, they went out and scored again. The even strength chances with the score tied now stand at 28-21 in favour of the Flyers through three games. Every time I look at those numbers, I'm surprised anew. The Hawks had best get it together if they plan on winning this thing.
As I said in the opening, Joel Quenneville was crazy about getting his matchups. Considering the depth of his lineup, the dude should probably lay off the gas a little, especially since it seemed like the Flyers wanted to get Briere on Bolland and Richards on Toews which leaves Marian Hossa and Patrick Sharp to dance. That's not what I would have done in Laviolette's shoes but it's what he went with. Why is that so bad for Chicago? My best guess is that Quenneville doesn't trust the Kane-Toews-Byfuglien group to take on the best the other team has to offer, which is just a little bit baffling to me given Toews' role at the Olympics. I guess Patrick Kane and Dustin Byfuglien just aren't as good as I thought they were.
The Sons of Light
3. Scott Hartnell - He was such a fun player to watch. I don't normally put a lot of stock in "hits" as a skill but the players that do it are a lot more fun for fans and often they also exhibit the strong-along-the-boards physicality that I think really helps to win games, which is what I saw from Hartnell tonight. In addition to being the "energy" player extraordinaire, Hartnell added a beautiful assist on the first power play goal and scored the second power play goal himself.
2. Duncan Keith - Holy mackerel! This series has a lot of good defensemen! There were more than a few times when he was scrambling to get back into position but I thought he was clearly the Hawks' best player in defeat. Much like Pronger in Game One, the EV chances with Keith on and off the ice tell a story: +8 -7 with Keith on the ice and +4 -9 with him on the bench. Again, like Pronger in Game One, Keith dominated on the Corsi board, registering a team high +13 (the next closest Hawk was partner Brent Seabrook's +7). Watching first the Olympics and then these playoffs, I've been privileged to see a lot of really good Canadian defenders up close: Drew Doughty, Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook, Chris Pronger, Dan Boyle. It's my view that Doughty, Keith and Pronger are well clear of those other two but I have a hard time picking a favourite out of those last three. If forced to pick just one for one game, today I'd go with Keith.
1. Ville Leino - He had a truly outstanding game. The goal he scored was a gift from both the hockey gods and Patrick Sharp but there were many other times during the game when he was able to create something from nothing. My favourite play from Leino came on the power play to start the second period. After dancing with the puck toward the center of the ice and drawing the goaltender with him, he laid the puck back to Mike Richards for a glorious scoring chance. Richards missed the net but it was a great play to watch. The guy played the most sheltered 23:12 you can imagine - he led the Flyer forwards in ice time and had zero DZ draws at evens - but he made the most of it, leading the team in Corsi by a mile (+14) and turning that territorial advantage into chances.
The Sons of Darkness
3. Patrick Sharp - Sharp spent more of this game up against Briere's line than he did in Chicago and the results weren't nearly as pretty. Sharp ended the night +1 -4 in scoring chances against Briere and made a really poor decision on the third Flyer goal. Each of the defenders had targeted one player in a three-on-three situation, leaving the extra man (Leino) for Sharp. Sharp obviously didn't see that because he left Leino alone. Of course, Leino scored into the wide open net and the game was tied. One of many Hawks who simply need to be better.
2. Dan Carcillo - The minor penalty he took was in the first was in competition for the second worst call of the night but even setting that aside Carcillo wasn't very good. He was already bageled on the chances and his biggest goof of the evening. As the defenders went for a change Carcillo turned the puck-over carrying it across the blueline only to have his bacon saved by Chris Pronger who managed to beat Patrick Kane to the puck and prevent the breakaway. Clearly, Pronger is faster than he gets credit for.
1. Dave Bolland - He did get the defensive zone draws in Game Three. Quenneville was trying his absolute best to get the Bolland v. Richards match-up and to facilitate that, Bolland was sent out exclusively for defensive and neutral zone draws (10 DZ draws, 12 NZ draws and 0 OZ draws) but even still, those are some pretty awful numbers. It's a cruel twist for the Blackhawks that, as Quenneville got his preferred matchup more and more often as the game went on, it led his team to worse results: Bolland was +1 -5 head-to-head against Richards including +1 -4 in the third period and overtime. Even when Quenneville "won" the match game, he still lost.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Plus “Ville Leino” is a pretty badass name. I dunno why DRW got rid of him; having “Ville Leino” and “Valtteri Filppula” on the same team seems like a foolproof recipe for success.
Leino really wasn’t doing that well in Detroit and was nothing special on offence in the AHL either. I actually wouldn’t be too surprised if Philly took the opportunity to “pump and dump” Leino this summer. I’m sure that wasn’t their goal in the playoffs but his situational ice time is bonkers but his points might be tantalizing enough to someone that he could pick net something of real value.
by Scott Reynolds on Jun 3, 2010 1:38 PM MDT up reply actions
Heh, funny you should mention that. I’ve seen at least one Canucks fan mention that he(she)’d like Leino, due to him being a big-game performer or something.
by Passive Voice on Jun 4, 2010 1:34 AM MDT up reply actions
A high-end performance based on the percentages and zone starts would fit right in on the Canucks!
by Scott Reynolds on Jun 4, 2010 7:44 AM MDT up reply actions
That is one of the most intelligent, yet brutal, takedown of the Canucks I’ve ever seen.
Bravo, sir.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
hahahaha, zing. whatever though man, Mikael Samuelsson is a goal-scoring god and it’s Ken Holland who doesn’t know up from down.
by Passive Voice on Jun 4, 2010 5:05 PM MDT up reply actions
Not only the name, but he’s got a pretty badass beard, too. :)
He just didn’t work out in Detroit, probably for a bunch of reasons. I don’t think that he expected, when he came over from Finland, that the NHL was going to be as tricky for him as it was. He did extremely well in Finland, and I’m sure the adjustment to the NHL was frustrating because he was so used to his moves working, and now they weren’t, like a student who always did well in high school without studying much and then finding out that isn’t a winning strategy in college and he has to adjust or he won’t be successful. There was speculation that he and coach Babcock were at odds (but that’s probably impossible to determine unless actually in on conversations with the two of them).
He probably honestly needed a change of scenery and a fresh start to play well. It happens – every team has a few players they have picked up who performed poorly for others but just worked better for them than for anyone else.
The real test for him will be if he can sustain the effort and results over a full season. I think he possibly has the talent to do so, as he’s shown in flashes, but performing like that all the time instead of once in a while is a lot more difficult.
"While there's life, there's hope." --Cicero
Science nerd and proud of it!
Good report, as usual. Only mild disagreement, and you did touch on it, is I would have come right out and named Quenneville as the Father of Darkness or something. Just an awful game. His decision to put Hendry on the ice when Chicago took their only lead of the game resulted directly in that lead lasting all of 20 seconds as Hendry’s inability to deal with the play in front stood out in comparison to how easily Keith and Hjalmarsson were dealing with pressure situations. Now 3-3 he left Hendry out to finish his shift and Philly got another good chance right away before Hendry hit the bench for the duration. Check out chances against to EV TOI:
Keith 25:50 (7)
Hjalmarsson 19:50 (5)
Hendry 7:08 (4)
The absence of Kim Johnsson has been a rarely-mentioned backstory to these playoffs, but holy crap could the Hawks use him.
I know coaches try to spot guys in there, but in my view to put him out immediately after the goal was a gamble, the score was 3-2 and things were going good and that’s a moment where a team should be what I call “consolidating the score”. Error Q. (Hindsight B)
But that line change in OT was about as bad a fustercluck as you could see, neutral zone faceoff, I know! Let’s give the other guys a 5-on-3 for a few seconds!! The execution of the line change itself was a frickin’ disaster, the guys coming off got in the way of the guys coming on, who showed absolutely no urgency in getting involved. If I were Q my team would be spending a good chunk of the next practice working specifically on line changes on the fly, and the whip would be cracking real hard.
His other option as you suggest is to rethink this whole matchups thing, NOW THAT IT HAS COST HIM A GAME. Dick around, dick around, dick around, eventually you get burned, and that’s what happened. Not to mention how it impacts the offensive game, it disrupts the defensive flow. I’d rather have Kopecky backchecking than NOBODY.
In fact three games in I can’t shake the feeling that most of the Chicago team is looking like deer in the headlights for long stretches of each game. They may be playing against one of the worst playoff qualifiers from a conference so inferior it’s a wonder they even bother playing the games, but that said, it’s about time they started playing their game. Hawks have had at least a complete period of horrible hockey in each game so far.
This would be a real good time for Andrew Ladd to come into the series. Too bad they have no similar option with Johnsson.
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 Jun 3, 2010 9:48 AM MDT reply actions 1 recs
Kim Johnsson would make a huge difference for Chicago. Not only can he eat up the EV minutes, he’s also good on the PK. Jordan Hendry? He looks like a bad hockey player to me. As for Quenneville, I get the matchup stuff and there are situations where it might be appropriate but this didn’t seem like the one. Is it really the end of the world to have Toews/Richards and Bolland/Briere instead of vice versa? The Toews/Briere match wasn’t working anyway. A bit of an odd choice, especially since it seemed like Philly was leaving the Sharp line to Giroux and Betts if they had their way. Why get away from that? It seems like a simpler “Bolland and Hossa in the DZ and Toews and Hossa in the OZ with the 4th sprinkled in” might be a better solution on the road.
by Scott Reynolds on Jun 3, 2010 1:45 PM MDT up reply actions
This is all well said and seems correct. But I think the line matching thing has largely worked well in prior rounds
It may have won them a couple of those games – so having something that works well over time ‘backfiring’ once doesn’t scream for him give it up. It might just be a time to look at the tactic – and maybe refine it to work better or scale it back if it is just something that tool opponents time to figure out a solid counter-tactic
Confusion will be my epitaph.
Using Bruce’s 20/20 Hindsight Method, changing up off a neutral zone faceoff when the other guys have the puck and your bench is on the wrong side of centre would be the first thing to go. That really was a royal screw-up, and the three guys left on the ice complicated things further with some bad decisions under unexpected high duress.
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 Jun 4, 2010 9:31 AM MDT up reply actions
Really, the thing here isn’t to change the devotion to matchups, but to remind players when is and isn’t a blazingly stupid time to change. You know, that thing you should’ve nailed somewhere around your draft-10 season.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Bolland is 6/17 in this series so far.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Had a real tough game last night, for sure. Nearly scored on his own net in OT, then finally did get burned when his wingers abandoned ship. Not sure if that winner is on Bolland per se, it was a team-wide meltdown but he was part of it.
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 Jun 3, 2010 10:16 AM MDT up reply actions
Bolland was off double teaming a guy near the boards while he was leaving Keith in a 3 - 1 overmatch in the high slot
Much as I like Bolland, that wasn’t his great shining moment of competence there
Confusion will be my epitaph.
I don’t normally put a lot of stock in “hits” as a skill but the players that do it are a lot more fun for fans and often they also exhibit the strong-along-the-boards physicality that I think really helps to win games
That’s an interesting statement that I largely agree with. I put more stock in hits than you do, but in part because it’s something of a (far from perfect!!) proxy for that physicality that you refer to, which is otherwise unmeasured. Hartnell had an awesome game last night, and the hits were just one aspect of that.
Clearly, Pronger is faster than he gets credit for.
That has always been true. Watching Pronger live a number of times, esp. with the Oil in 2005-06 but also with the Blues and Ducks, I’ve always been impressed with his speed on those rare occasions that he needed to use it. Which is about 1% of the time; a huge part of his game is conservation of energy, that’s how the guy can play 30 minutes a night, and he has a near Doug Harvey-like quality of being able to control the pace of the game. But when the situation calls for it cuz the puck gets behind him and he has to turn and go get it, he will win the race more often than you expect. He’s a big boy with long legs and huge athletic talent, and he is fast.
The part of his game which is debatably getting more vulnerable, is mobility, lateral movement against guys going wide with speed. But man o man, you have to look real hard to find any weaknesses at all in the game of this horse. What a player.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
Perhaps the young blackhawk squad did believe if they showed up that the cup would be theirs without much of an effort. I mean, if you read anything prior to the series, they should have skipped the actual games right to the SC presentation….
For the first 2 games, that approach actually worked. They were able to exert minimal effort, be outplayed and still get the win.
Last night, that approach finally backfired, even though somehow they managed to still take the game to OT.
I’m obviously under the impression that Friday’s game might finally see a renewed emphasis on Blackhawk hockey? I’m hoping obviously against this…
Managing Editor - HockeyOutsiders.com
by HockeyOutsiders on Jun 3, 2010 11:10 AM MDT reply actions
In fairness to the Hawks, they were even in terms of EV chances in the first period and had a very nice stretch to start the third period to get them the lead. Neither team played very well in that one though. The effort comment is goofy. All of these guys are working hard to win and that’s for sure. That said, I can see why Flyer fans might have a chip on their collective shoulder after being written off by most folks before the series began.
by Scott Reynolds on Jun 3, 2010 1:55 PM MDT up reply actions
I don't think it is lack of effort or capability on either team's part
I am more seeing sloppy hockey between two good teams that have played each other, what, once in 2 seasons.
Neither team has a sense of what will work or a rythym to the play against a known opponent. Neither team has been able to establish their own system as the dominant tone of the game (and force the other team to play into it).
Confusion will be my epitaph.
Is looking at chances a great way to analyze a game because every team scores on roughly the same percentage of chances?
I don’t know if it’s similar to shooting percentages, where there’s no team that shoots better than others, but rather some that shoot more.
Pittsburgh sports all the way
I’d say that teams score on roughly the same percentage of their chances over the long haul, though certain teams are likely better than others. Certainly some players are better than others. A scoring chance from Sidney Crosby is more dangerous than one from Eric Godard. It’s obvious but important to remember.
by Scott Reynolds on Jun 3, 2010 1:51 PM MDT up reply actions
I figured some players would be much better at capitalizing on chances than others just because of talent differentials. But I’m really intrigued by all the chance analysis you, Derek and others have put up. It seems like a great way to analyze a game because it sort of normalizes for shot quality.
Either way, very nice write-up Scott.
Pittsburgh sports all the way
I fully anticipate that once we start seeing these stats on a league-wide basis we will see a range of scoring chance conversion percentage that won’t be all that different from team shooting percentage. Some teams are better at finishing than others. Creating chances is the first part of the job.
And already we will be dealing with issues of recorder bias, which is why I hope when the project takes hold there will be two scorers for each game, one from each team. RTSS has proven the one-scorer method doesn’t work well, so hopefully whatever network is established to do this project will avoid the NHL’s mistakes.
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 Jun 3, 2010 5:32 PM MDT up reply actions
we will see a range of scoring chance conversion percentage that won’t be all that different from team shooting percentage
To clarify, the range won’t be all that different. The percentages themselves will be different (higher) numbers
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 Jun 3, 2010 11:09 PM MDT up reply actions
Some teams are better at finishing than others.
I thought I remembered reading somewhere that every team has roughly the same shooting percentage over the long run, with the main difference coming in the volume of shots taken.
Pittsburgh sports all the way
You probably did read that somewhere, doesn’t make it right. Read this.
It’s also partly an interpretation thing. Is 10% roughly the same as 8%? The difference is only 2%! (Or 20%, or 25%, depending on how you look at it.)
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 Jun 4, 2010 9:22 AM MDT up reply actions
Thanks! There’s a gold mine of interesting data there. Watch for Parts 2-? in the coming weeks … I got tied up in some history assignments this week!
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 Jun 4, 2010 3:28 PM MDT up reply actions
No, I’m just an old fart. But I do love my history!
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 Jun 4, 2010 4:41 PM MDT up reply actions
he's an astronomer
which is kind of the same thing, as he looks back in time every time he glances at the sky.
"While there's life, there's hope." --Cicero
Science nerd and proud of it!
Is looking at chances a great way to analyze a game because every team scores on roughly the same percentage of chances?
We’re not sure yet. We know that the individual player rates vary, however. Dustin Penner converts on a much higher percentage of chances than Ethan Moreau, for example.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
I figured that would be true. It’s a shame there’s no data set that has chances for teams.
Either way I really like what you guys are doing here. Seems like a very effective way to see which team’s performing better.
Pittsburgh sports all the way
I had a quick look at the habs conversion rates (for the regular season) and it’s suprisingly near; something like 15% for Cammalleri and 12% for Gomez. Not sure if it’s sustainable from one year to the other and finding a good threshold (say 100 scoring chances on the year) is important. As a team, the habs converted 13% of the scoring chances I recorded.
More interesting is the special teams: At 5v4 the habs converted 20% of their chances while allowing 14% conversions at 4v5. Again, luck? I classified chances as rebounds when they came 5 seconds or less after another chance from the same team. Both the habs and opponents converted 7/20 rebound at 5v4, but on clear shots the habs converted 20% (46/174) while the opposition converted 12% (34 / 236) on those.
Dunno how it correlates to shots overall, I just have too much on my plate these days to actually look at that thoroughly and write something (I just peeked into a spreadsheet I made a month or so ago).
I need to finish 13 games that Dennis didn’t count, to get the full stats array, but it’s looking like the Oilers converted on about 13.5% of their chances and were converted against on 16%.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
It sure seems like the conversion rates are consistently coming in around 1/7 to 1/8. Of course there is a Huge difference between those two numbers, but that’s the sort of range I would expect to see between different teams based on skill differences.
I had a quick look at the habs conversion rates (for the regular season) and it’s suprisingly near; something like 15% for Cammalleri and 12% for Gomez.
Well, these are conversion rates On as opposed to personal rates, right? We don’t have much info on the individual level. (I think Dennis attributes Oiler scoring chances to a single player as well as recording whose on ice at the time, but I think he’s the only one who does this.) So given we are recording team events with a given player out there one would expect a narrower range from player to player, in the same manner that Sh% On has a narrower range than individual Sh%.
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 Jun 3, 2010 11:18 PM MDT up reply actions
Well, these are conversion rates On as opposed to personal rates, right?
That is correct. It’s amazing the difference between some of these players though. Now that we have two seasons of Oiler data, it’s all the more interesting.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Well, these are conversion rates On as opposed to personal rates, right?
Nope, personal rates. What can I say, I’m a sucker for these. The nice crosstabs for on-ice rates will be up at my site somewhere next week.
To be clear, do you identify individual players with each scoring chance as well as all players on the ice? So Gomez personally converted 12% of his own chances, as opposed to Montreal converted 12% of its chances while Gomez was on the ice?
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 Jun 4, 2010 3:24 PM MDT up reply actions
I identify individual Montreal players with each Scoring Chances for MTL and the % I rolled out were those of individual players; so Gionta had 17 5v5 goals over 101 scoring chances.
And it seems I messed up by rolling PP SC with 5v5 ones. Gomez is 13% overall but at 5v5, he is 9% (6/65) while Cammalleri is near 16% (19/120) and Gionta, as you can see, almost at 18%. So there is more separation than I tought. But the main reason I recorded those infos was because I wanted to see if there was a separation between Shots attempts and Scoring chances from one player to the other and if it was anything but noise.
Plugging this into TOI.com (my sample have ENG tough so some discrepancies,but whatever):
5v5 SC vs Fenwick
Gomez: 65 / 167 (38.9%)
Gionta: 101 / 237 (42.6%)
Cammalleri (I actually have him at 24 goals overall instead of 26?!): 120 / 213 (56.3%)
Wow. Looks like Cammalleri found a way to make them count, eh? Did Dennis do anything like that with the Oilers? I’d bet a fair wage those aren’t that sustainable… I mean one out of two shots a Scoring Chance?
Yeah, like all the New Statistics, it takes a little while for them to gain a critical mass. Two years data are better than one, for sure. I noticed the same thing with Staples’ Error project as one example. Similarly, each additional year of Desjardins numbers adds context and meaning to the entire data set. One complicating factor is that the methodology itself is likely evolving during the early stages of any project.
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 Jun 4, 2010 3:22 PM MDT up reply actions
It really seemed to me that, just watching the goals themselves, Leighton had a better night, in the sense that I couldn’t fault him for at least two of the three goals (and the third was a Kane shot right between the pad and the blocker near the torso, which seems like it would be next to impossible to stop), whereas Niemi looked like he was really fighting the puck all night, when it wasn’t slipping right through him.
I also remember thinking over the course of this game, “You know, it might really benefit the Hawks to lose this one, so Coach Q has the excuse he needs to perform the rectal craniotomy this team desperately needs.” Credit where credit’s due to Philly, but man, there were a bunch of really unnecessary fire drills in the DZ in the third that had me wondering where the hell the Chicago Blackhawks went and why they’d been replaced with their farm team.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
I think it may be time to realize that Bolland isn’t Michael Peca and that Jonathan Toews might just be good enough (minus Buffaloen) to handle himself in any situation.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Agree with both comments. This is an ideal time for Quenneville to really crack the whip and to demand more discipline from his crew. But he needs to revisit his own strategies and theories on match-ups, because what he is doing isn’t working. Philly is winning the current match-ups to my eye, so maybe he should welcome a power v. power if that’s what Laviolette wants. Less of a distraction to just go out there and win your shift rather than keeping one eye on the benches all the time.
I think Toews can hold his own with anyone. Maybe that would be a good line for Ladd to return to, cuz he’s a tough minutes guy. Buf isn’t doing enough to distract Pronger, who seems to be shutting down the whole darn line.
What I said yesterday, “Don’t fuck with a winning streak” is as true as ever. What has changed since then is, winning streak’s over.
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 Jun 3, 2010 5:42 PM MDT up reply actions
Don’t fuck with a winning streak...
… is one of my pet pieves, actually. Next series is a whole different matchup. So matchup from the beginning not from what worked against an altogether different team.
Kane-Toews-Byfuglien group to take on the best the other team has to offer, which is just a little bit baffling to me given Toews’ role at the Olympics. I guess Patrick Kane and Dustin Byfuglien just aren’t as good as I thought they were.
This is a line like Thorntons in SJ. You want them with the puck because the Hawks two wingers aren’t strong on defense. It’s ok against a purely checking line but not so good against a two way line.
Also, In my opinion having them together means you can’t have Toews out there for defensive draws. They need Brouwer at least back on that line.
In my opinion the Hawks should have matched two way lines with two way lines. That way they don’t need to care as much about the matchups…
I hear what you’re saying, esp. about the new series part. I’m just trying to think along with the coach, not out-think the coach. What are his motivations? I’d say they just changed.
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 Jun 3, 2010 6:46 PM MDT up reply actions
See, when you’re winning on luck (see SAN JOSE SERIES) you change things
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
San Jose changed things, Chicago didn’t, and Chicago kept on winning.
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 Jun 3, 2010 7:47 PM MDT up reply actions

by 




































