Costly Mistakes, A Stellar Ward, Do In Habs
by Robert L on Apr 1, 2010 1:47 AM EDT
Email
Print
This is depressing folks...
The Carolina Hurricanes record is not indicative of the team that they are. Coming into the game with only five losses less than the Canadiens, the Hurricanes, who were dwellers in the NHL cellar for half the season, presented a misleading foe for the Habs.
A solid enough team Carolina is, they were not to be taken lightly on any count, but were the Canadiens truly prepared to face such a proud team, who looked themselves to be the ones in a fight for playoff survival?
On appearances, the Canadiens took the challenge quite seriously, as they came out guns just a-blazin' in the first period, outshooting the Canes 12-2 and going up by one on a power play goal by Marc-Andre Bergeron. It was 1-1 after two periods with the shots being 25-10 in Montreal's favour.
So what the hell happened?
Cam Ward, for starters, stole this game. The Canadiens had glorious chances in the first 40 to take and pad their lead, and were stymied time and again by the Canes stopper. Carey Price, and the opposite, was a game saver himself many times over. Neither of Carolina's goals were attributable to him.
On the first Carolina goal, Roman Hamrlik dove to strip Brandon Sutter of the puck, and in his shute pushed it past a bowled over Price.
"Like, thanks for the hand, man. Just let me stop in next time!"
On the second, Eric Staal was left uncovered at the side of the Canadiens goal, and tapped a rebound past Price.
On both goals, the coverage was badly blown. More on that in a bit.
Now do you find the Canadiens fragile in psyche at times, in games like this where something is on the line?
Where exactly did all that dominance go come the third period?
By all appearances, the Staal goal sapped the Habs, set them on their heels. From then on, Carolina took charge and the Canadiens never recovered.
What happens to make the confidence displayed earlier, just dissolve into thin air?
When the Habs were on the attack for two periods, I found them to be squeezing their sticks quite a bit, firing prematurely, opting for bad angles over patience. They were getting chances by the bunches, but often squandered them through over-anxiousness.
The trouble is, and it is part of what confounds the Canadiens in the bigger picture, is that the shot count is practically irrelevant in whole, as it is shot quality that matters most. Montreal hit net 35 times, but had 33 others blocked or fired wide. By now, we all can see what size up front and perimeter play have to do with this.
And the stinker is that it just doesn't go away. Each of the top lines needs to add grit elements in games. On precise shifts, would it not be a damned good idea once in a while to send out Lapierre, Moen, Darche to create some well planned crease havoc when the opponent is backed in. It just might create shooter space or an added passing lane.
Nonetheless, in this game, getting so many chances is awesome, and players generally believe fully that they will cash in sooner or later. Only this time it didn't pay off. For two periods, the Canadiens players shook their heads. Ward saw most of what was directed his way.
When Staal scored the go ahead goal, it was a stunner, a shock to the system. You could see the air being sucked out of the balloon. As the goal energized the Canes, it demoralized the Habs, and that lost step was not recovered.
How did the Canadiens get behind the eight ball in a game they had control of?
Two pivotal mistakes, leading to the Canes goals defined this game, and robbed the Canadiens of the opportunity they had to gain two precious points.
On the Sutter goal, Hamrlik totally screwed up. He had a step on the Carolina forward at mid ice, maintained it to the blue line, missed his one good shot at playing the body, and Sutter burst around him. In the entire play, he looked caught off guard, as though he was expecting another play to develop and was surprised by Sutter's speed.
In desperation, Hamrlik lunged for the puck after Sutter had blasted by him. It was a mirror play of the one that lead to Chris Lee's ghost tripping call in the Jersey game. As Hamrlik sprawled, his body took out Price and his leg seemed to sweep the puck into the net.
Now twice in two games? I'd expect a veteran defenseman to be a whole lot more focused on what is coming at him.
On the Staal goal, the Canadiens had just killed off a two minute minor to Cammalleri when the puck entered the Canadiens zone. A few plays toward the net were made, and the Canes Ray Whitney grabbed a loose puck behind the Habs' net and headed straight for the right side boards.
Ryan O' Byrne was blamed and sat for blowing coverage on Staal, who had come from out of the right corner to the net somewhat unobserved. O' Byrne's attention was on the play developing at the point. He had come over from his left defense position to play the middle, as it was his partner Markov who tailed Whitney up the boards, leaving him one on one with Staal. O' Byrne never had Staal in his sights, he'd just gotten there, to the spot vacated by Markov, when the point shot went by him and bounced to the Canes centerman.
The entire mess was a unit of five breakdown. Carolina had managed to get their top line of Stall, Whitney and Cole out against Cammalleri (just out of the box), Lapierre and Moen. Markov broke rank by pursuing Whitney into an area of coverage that was already accounted for by Cammalleri and Moen. The play looked like schoolyard kids chasing a gum wrapper in the swirling wind.
Oddly, O'Byrne was the one player in position on the play, but he was late in reacting to Staal coming out from the corner. As it happened, Cammalleri enterd the ice onto his off wing.
Bummer, ain't it not. But how did the Canes get their top line out there immediately after their powerplay had expired? The Canadiens had a bad match up go out of position.
On both goals, veteran defenseman were burned.
Hard to say if this game was lost in the first when Montreal failed to add a second crucial goal, or when they capitulated in the third, when their foes sprung prongs.
This one hurts big time, and the Canadiens desperately need to win on Friday, if for nothing more than their seeping confidence.
23 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Kinda disagree with you on the first statement Robert. The first 30 minutes of the game Carolina was one of the worst teams I’ve ever seen. How many times were they going to let Bergeron drop bombs from the point on that PP? They were horrendous, yet our guys still just couldn’t capitalize. And once again they blow a game, and as a throw back to October a defenseman kicks the puck past Price.
http://berkshireonthehabs.blogspot.com/
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 1, 2010 2:03 AM EDT reply actions
When you said that Carolina is a deceptively strong opponent. I know they have a great second half record, but what I saw tonight was a terribly disorganized team with an even worse coach than Jacques Martin, who happens to have an amazing goalie. Unfortunately they were done two massive favours by Hamrlik knocking the puck past Price, and then every Habs player forgetting Eric Staal exists.
Sorry if I sounded stand-offish, this loss stung.
http://berkshireonthehabs.blogspot.com/
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 1, 2010 2:17 AM EDT up reply actions
You didn’t at all, no worries!
I never meant to intone that the Canes were deceptively strong, only a much sounder team than their record would indicate. The Habs got a big jump on them early on, but I doubt the same scenario plays out when they meet next week.
It seems like the Habs have been focusing so much on strong starts that by the end of the game we have nothing left… It’s basically a strategy of get a small lead and then hope the goalie wins it. Frustratingly Jacques Martin like…
http://berkshireonthehabs.blogspot.com/
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 1, 2010 3:18 AM EDT up reply actions
I noticed that as well. The trouble with that is they cannot build a sustainable lead. Can’t say for sure if it lack of killer instinct or not. What really pains is that you can see that the players care and give it what they have. It’s just not enough too much of the time….and Price is cursed, I think.
They cared?
The pitiful effort in the third didn’t look like a team that cared. Earlier in the year with a less talented roster due to injuries, this team would have gone full bore and attacked the offensive zone for the last 10 minutes, but the team last night was content to sit in their zone and set up pretty plays rather than getting after it. There was no aggressiveness along the boards or fight to recover loose pucks. This was the same thing we saw against NJ…except we blew it off against the stifling defense of the Devils, well now we got manhandled in the same way…by the Canes!!!
There are no excuses for the lack of energy since they were off for several days. Earlier in the year you criticized the coaching for the lack of preparation in the first when they came out lackluster, so now I want to blame the players for the lack of effort in the third. From where I was sitting, the complete absence of urgency is what cost us last night. I really couldn’t tell if they cared.
by blockersave93 on Apr 1, 2010 7:18 AM EDT up reply actions
2 quotes
"We could have had more traffic in front of him. This is the NHL and the goalies are going to make that first save most of the time. We need to get guys there for rebounds, screens. We beat ourselves."
"It was a tough one, but the game should have been gone in the first half. We had tons of scoring chances, especially in the first period. It should be been 3-0, 4-0 and we wouldn’t be talking now about a loss."
First quote is an acceptable response to the crappy game last night. Second quote is why we lost. “the game should have been gone in the first half,” but it wasn’t, so where was the push in the third?
It is possible that the lack of a captain is hurting the team now. Sure there are a bunch of vets on this team, but someone needed to kick the team in the ass last night, someone wearing a C. They needed a player to step up to win it., this was a loss because of effort and accountability not coaching.
Incidentally, Gionta was the first quote and Pleks was the second. Couldn’t find a quote from Cam, I’d like to see what his take on the game was, he was strong in the first but trailed off badly. Is he still recovering or did he agree with one of the above quotes?
This is exactly the challenge
in writing about the Habs.
The entire mess was a unit of five breakdown. Carolina had managed to get their top line of Stall, Whitney and Cole out against Cammalleri (just out of the box), Lapierre and Moen. Markov broke rank by pursuing Whitney into an area of coverage that was already accounted for by Cammalleri and Moen. The play looked like schoolyard kids chasing a gum wrapper in the swirling wind.
Most people will watch that play and come to one of two conclusions (not based on speculation, but what I read last night). 1. O’Byrne sucks, he didn’t cover Staal. 2. Price left a brutal rebound for Staal.
That was solid rebound control by Price, you can’t steer every shot in the corner. He made the save and the rebound sat inches off his pad for him to smother or have a defenseman pick it up. He controlled the rebound, unfortunately it was Staal on the lip and not Kostopolous who would have banged it back into his pads. It was one of the occasions where kicking it uncontrolled back out to the slot would have been beneficial.
Anybody who has played in a defensive system understands how one man straying from the system leads to multiple breakdowns. Markov over pursuing leads to a collapse of responsibilities. He didn’t trust his teammates and hung O’Byrne and Price out to dry.
So anybody without any understanding of hockey leaps to first generation thought. Why didn’t Price make the save? or Why didn’t O’Byrne pick up his man? Markov gets away scott free because he isn’t in the view of the screen when the puck crosses the goal line.
I disagree with you time to time Robert, but this is exactly why I became a fan of the site in the first place. Analysis like this help open the mind to the game within the game.
This is not 1990 anymore. People need to stop accepting spoon fed hyperbole and opinion based on an individual who was hired because they have a degree from a broadcasting program or a writing degree. Like it or not, this is an interactive generation and the information is readily available at our fingertips, it is laziness to accept anything less than challenging the conventional wisdom.
Sure it is hard work to surf through the crap and uninformed opinions that make up the blogosphere. It is hard work to look into game logs and find the reality of the situation. It is hard to challenge yourself to learn a game that you think you know because you watched it since you were 6.
But that is where the truth lies, not in Pierre McGuire’s agenda driven catch phrases and brand building.
Hats off to you Robert in my continuing education of the game. In my obsession with assessing Price’s positioning I have a tendency to miss these types of nuggets, your understanding is always appreciated by me.
Thanks for that Chris. Sometimes I think I am aiming right over heads with some of this or cruising under a radar of sorts. It’s nice to see it when things are picked up on. Other times I wonder why I bother to break games down into minute (my noot!) detailed analysis, fearing that most opinions my just say “Who is this guy flapping his lips?” Thanks for reassuring that all is not lost.
Occasionally, we have our little disagreements and misunderstands I suppose, but that where we get eduvation from. Bring it on, I say!
If you don’t disagree with somebody, you are never challenged.
I have zero problem with disagreements.
The blogosphere is challenging the establishment. It forces them to not rely on their inside sources and regurgitating what they hear from individuals in the know. At the end of the day, hockey coverage will improve because the new generation of writers has been honed on instant feedback and the art of defending your work.
This is the early phase, but things are changing rapidly. Live in the past, get left behind.
It’s an interesting point you are making, Chris. But I’ll beleive it when I see it. Mainstream medias thrive not on innovation but on wall to wall coverage of subjects. They are, aside from a few stray souls, just glad to leave the labor intensive work of actually parsing the data to fringe actors and simply keep doing what theyve always done. If some innovator comes across something nice, they’ll gobble it up, wedge it in some place wher it fits in their general environment and then get back to doing what they have always done. This is what they did with websites, with blogs and this is what they’ll do with whatever else get thrown their way.
Being the big guy in the room has its advantages.
I listened to the game on CJAD via the internet last night. Just glad I wasn’t able to watch. I’m sure I’ve said this before, but, for the life of me, I don’t understand why Gainey chose Jacques Martin when he could, presumably, have chosen Jacques Lemaire to coach Canadiens. OK, I know, Lemaire can be prickly; but he’s a smart guy. There are times when this team just seems out to lunch. The balance isn’t right either, but that’s more the fault of the front office.
I believe that it was Lemaire who opted for Jersey when they came into the picture. Knowing Lemaire’s distaste for media, it’s surprising that he’d even consider Montreal a second time around, and not at all startling that he opted to go back to the swamps. Hard to hang this on Gainey, knowing that.
Plus, New Jersey simply is a more talented team. Coaches tend to like that if they want to win championships.
Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.
It can’t hurt that the Devils are playing essentially the same system you introduced 20 years ago and do not have to re-educate.
Well, yes, I know the Montreal media are tough. But the New York media are tough too, though, obviously, not hockey-centric-tough.
I was thinking about this in the car just now—I was running errands—and I kept coming back to the fact that Jacques Lemaire is one of the few coaches I ever watched out-coach Scotty Bowman in the playoffs. I watched every game of that series—and I yield to no one in my admiration for Scotty—and the fact is that Lemaire did the better job. And Bowman probably had the better team too.
Think about it? Who else has out-coached Scotty when it really counted—and when the teams were relatively equal? OK, sure, Toe Blake, but the teams weren’t remotely equal. Emile Francis twice maybe, but I’m not so sure; the ’74 team was playing minus Dryden.
Who else?
I watch the Devils a lot and have for years now. Lemaire is a very fine coach playing for the guy who is probably the best GM in the game. Tough organization, year in, year out.
by JohninOssining on Apr 1, 2010 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
That year, 1995, I had bet a friend that the Devils would sweep, no word of a lie. I based it on the fact that Bowman, due to the lockout that reduced the season to 48 games, would be unfamiliar with countering and adjusting to what New Jersey and Lemaire presented as a system. It was probably the most daring claim I ever made, and no one was more surprised than me when it came out bang on. Oddly, the day I made that bet, and the reason it even came up, was because I had purchased a Red Wings jersey (I still have) for twelve bucks at bankruptcy sale. I put number 95 on it, because I was so sure they would win the Cup. Watching the playoffs that year and seeing the Devils cruise through the Bruins, Flyers and Penguins told me that they might just pick Detroit apart. Worst of all, the bet was a friendly fiver with my friend Jacques, who neverpaid up!
Bowman being outcoached
What about Arbour in 1993?
Bowman’s Pens were upset when they had a far superior team.
'Moderate success' achieved again! What about excellence?
I know this may generate a head shake or two, and I apologize in advance for stating what is painfully obvious…however it would seem to me Montreal is sorely lacking in both size and stamina and heart. Small skill guys certainly have their place, but the hab line-up is dotted with them. Did anyone notice the hab-less Team Canada of the Olympics, that managed to pocket a gold medal… with solid size,stamina and above all desire. Sorry gang, but its high time the Canadiens “braintrust”, structured a team on what works. The Canadiens began entering the era of ‘moderate success’, vs.the usual tradition of excellence; about the time they began scouting USA and Europe, instead of a home grown approach. Just a couple of thoughts, I needed to get off my chest. cheers
by cradleofhockey(n.s.) on Apr 1, 2010 5:50 PM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
