One Step Forward…


All in all, it was a well played game.  Sure, the loss was unfortunate, and considering the recent record, the two points were sorely needed, but you can’t make a goaltender play poorly.

But you can make them look good, and to some degree, that was the case yesterday.  Too many shots high or wide, and not enough easy plays of just getting the puck to the net.

But Lundqvist did play well, and the defense did a good job of blocking shots, especially late in overtime.

Fortunately the officiating was more even handed, although Girardi’s “boarding” pass was tough to swallow, I mean, if those aren’t the kind of calls EVERYONE wants to see, what is?  A puck over the glass is an automatic, but boarding is a judgement call…hmmm.

I thought Ruutu was outstanding, playing hard in all areas, and laying the body with regularity.  Neil also had some nice hits, and certainly kept the defense honest in the neutral zone and below the icing line.

I was surprised to see Neil in front of the net while on the PP in overtime, would have thought Ruutu or Cheech was the better choice, but that’s just armchair coaching.

Kovy was benched in the third, and judging by his lazy line change in overtime, it had no impact.  If he could just add a little urgency to his game it would make a 100% difference.  I’m not talking anything drastic, just quit floating when out of the play.

Picard was top 3 in D ice time.  I don’t get it, I simply do not get it.  Look, I want the guy to succeed, I have no axe to grind, but I just don’t see him as the default #4 guy with Volchy out.  If he is, Lord help us, we need a Dman BAD!

GN

 

 

Advertisements

5 Responses to “One Step Forward…”

  1. CanuckAbroad Says:

    I seriously hope that playing all those minutes by picard is only to show other teams that he is capable of playing the minutes and that he is going to be traded fairly soon. I agree some other D man a change up on D is needed.

    I hope that picard is the healthy scratch when volchenkov comes back because Lee definitely doesn’t deserve to come out.

  2. You forgot to mention that Kovalev was absolutely brilliant in the first period – he must have set up 4 Sens and they muffed their shots – a little finish and they would have been ahead 3 – 0 in the first

    He’s not a forechecker like Fisher who spends so much useless energy chasing Dman who have already made the play around him – hmmm – more energy for Kovie and more hockey smarts for Fish …. that’s the ticket

  3. Kerry,
    Absolutely. And that is my point, just a bit more, just a bit, and he goes from being a negative in the secondary effort, to a positive.
    He was brilliant at times, but then he floats, and creates a bad change or a bad out manned advantage and it brings the whole team down.
    The thing about rushing the D (a la Fish) is that it prevents the set up in the nuetral zone, the intention isn’t so much to turn the puck over as to force the D to fumble/rush the break-out. Even if it doesn’t happen everytime, if the Dman knows he’s going to be checked, eventually he’ll rush the play, and then create a nuetral zone turn over.
    GN

    • Fisher is an excellent forechecker – no question about it – however, you have to realize that break-out schemes are predicated on drawing the lead forechecker to one side and then reversing the puck or perhaps going up a lane in front of the goal – Dmen are willing to take a hit if the lead forechecker over commits – too often Fisher attacks when the D are in control of the puck – he would be wiser to drop back and set up a trap in those cases – not surprisingly Alfreddson is probably the best at making those reads whereas Fisher is more likely to attack and Kovalev is more likely to fall back and set up for a counter=attack

      Perhaps we are showing bias in that Sens fans prefer a Canadian versus European style of play – but overall in the last game at least – Kovalev was far more dangerous than Fisher who appears to be in one of his infamous goal-scoring slumps – perhaps, perhaps the energy he expends inevitably results in down games when he is unable to turn on the jets

      on the other hand – poor line changes are inexcusable – and this can easily be solved by a bit of effort

      • I prefer the model of an aggressive forecheck, which forces the D into taking a specific lane, and having to move the puck prior to his team being “set” in their break-out.
        In your example, the Dman would be able to move the puck up the ice, then identify the open man, or option the dump in.
        With an aggressive forecheck, the likelihood of a turn-over in the neutral zone is much higher, as the defending forwards can read the rushers options as well as the attacking forwards.
        But it’s a matter of systems I guess.
        GN

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: