Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
storm-rider

Post Game Analysis 2/12-Bruins

Recommended Posts

I really would not consider the 2nd goal Cam's fault. He did what Goalies are taught...am I right? He stopped the puck and froze, at least he thought he did.

I'm not sure you can blame anyone. Everyone was where they were supposed to be. The puck just didn't like being under Cam's *edit* :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting stat line sidenote is the TOI for the game for the D.

Hedican and Gleason played over 24 mins. each which is not unusual for other teams but very rare for the Canes. It's clear they are being positioned as the top pairing and the D-by-committee approach is perhaps diminishing. Both guys played 20+ mins at ES which is typically their totals for TOI in a game.

Corvo actually had the 3rd most ES minutes along the D corps which is somewhat surprising at first glance given his well-chronicled struggles with positioning. My view though was the Canes were determined to get the transition game back at ES and the Bruins aren't a team with great scoring depth so they opted for being aggressive vs. safe with him.

It did seem like the heavy reliance on rolling just 3 lines - Letowski, Hamilton and Brookbank combined for only about 8 mins. at ES - took its toll late in the game when the Canes basically stopped skating. But it was also due to getting too passive in terms of style to go along with whatever physical and mental fatigue might have seeped in.

Though the firepower quotient for the opponents are vastly different, this one kind of reminded me of a game against Buffalo in the Cup year where the Canes got out to a 4-goal lead on the road and then had to hang on as the Sabres scored 3 straight down the stretch. Auld's early play in the game last night was also somewhat like his final period meltdown in the RBC last season while with Florida as the Canes turned a 3-0 deficit to start the 3rd into a 6-3 win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Corvo looked "off" for a lot of the game, but hopefully that's just first game jitters. He made a nice play getting back once, but Wesley saved his butt on a sure Bruin breakaway.

Samsonov continues to look really good. What a heady play to not only skate around the D and kick the puck out but to immediately do a u-turn and head to the net. His stickhandling is fantastic.

I thought Bayda looked really good when he was out there, I wouldn't mind seeing him stick up here if he continues to play like that. Seems to have good chemistry with Aucoin for obvious reasons.

All that said, if we are going to make the playoffs, our best players really need to be our best players (*snicker*). Seriously though, we need some consistent production from Staal and Cole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought Corvo looked "off" for a lot of the game, but hopefully that's just first game jitters. He made a nice play getting back once, but Wesley saved his butt on a sure Bruin breakaway.

Samsonov continues to look really good. What a heady play to not only skate around the D and kick the puck out but to immediately do a u-turn and head to the net. His stickhandling is fantastic.

I thought Bayda looked really good when he was out there, I wouldn't mind seeing him stick up here if he continues to play like that. Seems to have good chemistry with Aucoin for obvious reasons.

All that said, if we are going to make the playoffs, our best players really need to be our best players (*snicker*). Seriously though, we need some consistent production from Staal and Cole.

Trip Tracy telestrated the play Wesley made, which was impressive, but failed to point out that Corvo was out of the play because he was prone on the ice along the far boards. I kept a close eye on Corvo during the game and though he was a bit unsettled at times, he was pretty solid in all zones, all things considered.

Agreed on Samsonov and Bayda as well as the Staal line. Whitney is nearly invisible except when he decides to get some penalty box exposure and Cole had 3 good shifts all game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew Ladd was oustanding. With Stillman gone, its now time for Ladd to show us what he's got and #16 did not let down. The Brind'Amour Line was just phenomenal. And if Ladd continues to drive to the net like he did last night, the ice will open for Brind'Amour and Sammy to do their thing. Keep these 3 together Lavi.

Poor Staal needs some linemates. Whitney is going to become my Commie penalty taker it seems. And although Cole actually backchecked and probably saved a goal, other than that he was invisible.

Walker and the rats where great as well. Their forechecking was fun to watch and all 3 were all other the place.

Cam had a great game. Those saves he was making with the glove was oustanding. I seriously thought Boston was gonna get a shortie when Hamilton misplayed the puck, but Cam came up huge. Great showing by him. Too bad his mind was on the shutout for 30 seconds, otherwise, he could have had one.

Corvo wasn't bad. He is pretty fast and is a very good skater. Looking forward to seeing him live tomorrow night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ON ESPN's Top Ten this morning at number 5 i think it was, they have Wardo making that great glove save. He has made some beautiful saves lately and I'm glad to see him get some national exposure finally. He deserves it. Who bribed ESPN to put up a Canes highlight?! LOL

I think Sammy's goal shoulda been in there too though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we probably played one of our best first periods of the year last night. Second period we seemed to slow down and lose energy. Third period we seemed to lose interest in winning. Our PP still is in a disastrous state. We have so little respect from other teams now that they forget they have a one man disadvantage and go into scoring mode, and as of late succeed.

I was impressed with Corvo's first appearance in a Canes uniform.

It might have been an ugly finish but 2 points is 2 points and we need them now anyway we can get them if we are to be in contention for the cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the lines are OK, we just need to let them stay together for awhile, and the chemistry and goal scoring will come. We also need to learn how to finish! We need to learn how to not only insert the dagger, but then twist. We should've won the game 6-0 last night. If we stop skating, stop hitting, we are DONE!

Let's go for about at least a 10 game win streak!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was an exciting game and a much needed win on the road.

The Good: On Day 1 + Corvo, the Canes played an equally struggling team and not a hot team - despite new line changes (again), the Canes were able to take the lead early in the first and not had to fight an uphill battle again - Ladder's two goals and gritty play in front of Auld and Brindy getting two assists - speaking of Auld, that Boston decided to play him over Thomas. Auld was shaky at best and gave up some huge rebounds all night - Cam was strong despite giving up two goals. The Bruins tested his high glove side a lot and other than their first goal late in the third, which I'm sure Cam wished he could have back, his glove sure "robbed" a number of Bruins - solid and no nonsense penalty killing (again) and a good effort defensively, on the forecheck and on the backcheck - Sammy's goal was sweet and a well deserved two point game for him - the hard work and resulting chances by the Walker, Bayda and Aucoin line, and of course little Aucoin knocking Lurch to the ice - despite a lot of back and forth in the neutral zone, the Canes' transition game looked improved - and last but not least, as an added benefit to an old Whaler fan, getting to listen to whining NESN commentators.

The Not-So-Good: A weak goal late in the game gave the Bruins some momentum. After Thornton's second goal of the night it was all Bruins until the final whistle, eventhough Chara got called for elbowing Wes and they had pulled their goalie - that Cole was not visible and only made the highlight reel because he lifted a Bruin's stick on the backcheck.

Side note: Kudos to the off-ice officials for allowing Ladd's second goal which clearly went off of Auld's stick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personnally considering the "shakeup" the defense rose to the occassion. Concerned we change the style of play when we get ahead. If we would keep pressing and playing the type of game that got us there we would win alot more.

It can take awhile especially for a defensman to get their legs under them on a new team.

Sam SON ov is awsome to watch. It is his intelligence and what he does after passing and shooting that impress my. That part reminds me of another guy we used to have. (no 10)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the lines are OK, we just need to let them stay together for awhile, and the chemistry and goal scoring will come.

I agree with this. I actually really hope that Staal/Cole/Whitney can stay together. If they all (mostly Cole/Whitney) start playing to their potential our top 2 lines could be FORCES out there. Get Cullen back and we are on our way.

And for God's sake, stop playing NOT TO LOSE when we get the lead!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Side note: Kudos to the off-ice officials for allowing Ladd's second goal which clearly went off of Auld's stick.

Is the official statement as to why that goal was allowed to stand? Because it is clearly a kicking motion and not just a turning of the skate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Side note: Kudos to the off-ice officials for allowing Ladd's second goal which clearly went off of Auld's stick.

Not according to Ladd: (From the story in the canes website) "Ladd made it 2-0 when he kicked the puck past Auld at the 6:33 mark of the first."

"I just turned my foot. It was more of a reaction more than anything else," Ladd said. "I just turned my foot, and it went in."

http://hurricanes.nhl.com/team/app/?service=page&page=Recap&seas=20072008&gtype=2&gnum=852' target="_blank">http://hurricanes.nhl.com/team/app/?servic...=2&gnum=852[/post]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not according to Ladd: (From the story in the canes website) "Ladd made it 2-0 when he kicked the puck past Auld at the 6:33 mark of the first."

"I just turned my foot. It was more of a reaction more than anything else," Ladd said. "I just turned my foot, and it went in."

http://hurricanes.nhl.com/team/app/?service=page&page=Recap&seas=20072008&gtype=2&gnum=852' target="_blank">http://hurricanes.nhl.com/team/app/?servic...=2&gnum=852[/post]

There's a difference between redirecting and kicking. There was no distinct kicking motion. He angled his foot to redirect the puck, but he never made the distinct kicking motion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the official statement as to why that goal was allowed to stand? Because it is clearly a kicking motion and not just a turning of the skate.

Not according to Ladd: (From the story in the canes website) "Ladd made it 2-0 when he kicked the puck past Auld at the 6:33 mark of the first."

"I just turned my foot. It was more of a reaction more than anything else," Ladd said. "I just turned my foot, and it went in."

Honestly, I don't know what the official statement was. I guess the explanation got lost somewhere between Millbury or his sidekick actually calling the officials for an explanation, them talking about a clear kicking motion and whining about if Ladd is gonna be allowed to score by throwing the puck in the next time, and me rewinding the tape a few times to look at the play in slo-mo. What I saw is that Ladd moved his right skate to the puck, true, but also that the puck then deflected ever so slightly from Ladd's left skate he was standing on to Auld's angled stick on the ice, and bounced way up an in. I guess that kinda makes the (obvious) kicking motion a moot point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether kicked, hit, thrown, shoved, brushed, swatted, batted, punched, deflected, or re-directed..im just glad they called it a goal. I would hate to think that, had it been waived off..and Boston still scored 2..they go to OT...then possibly...**GULP** shootout...speaking of which...anybody know how "Patty and Joey" ;) are in the SO?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether kicked, hit, thrown, shoved, brushed, swatted, batted, punched, deflected, or re-directed..im just glad they called it a goal. I would hate to think that, had it been waived off..and Boston still scored 2..they go to OT...then possibly...**GULP** shootout...speaking of which...anybody know how "Patty and Joey" ;) are in the SO?

It doesn't matter what the SO is like. Joe in OT..just look at game 2 of the Sabres series last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether kicked, hit, thrown, shoved, brushed, swatted, batted, punched, deflected, or re-directed..im just glad they called it a goal. I would hate to think that, had it been waived off..and Boston still scored 2..they go to OT...then possibly...**GULP** shootout...speaking of which...anybody know how "Patty and Joey" ;) are in the SO?

I don't want to sound like a homer, but I thought it was clearly a goal from every angle I saw. He turns his skate and points it in the direction of where the puck is coming from and then flexes his knee. At no time did his leg come forward in a distinct kicking motion. I was surprised Forslund was so quick to discount it when you could see his knee was stationary.

On shootouts, Eaves rarely got a sniff given their depth but I think I did see him in one of those extra rounds but nothing memorable. Corvo wouldn't be used unless it went longer than 10 rounds or so. There are only a handful of Dmen who get regular rotation tries and if you haven't seen Letang from the Pens you're missing a good one. Hopefully he won't be putting the puck in the net, except his own, tomorrow night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a thought, the puck was coming towards the net from about a 90 degree angle,for Ladd to make a distinct kicking motion towards the net the way he was standing,his leg would have had to kick towards the net, to me it looked like he brought his foot forwards which would have been towards the side boards. Which again is on a 90degree angle to the net.He would have had to kick his leg completely sideways to be a distinct kicking motion towards the net.So when his leg isn't going towards the net how can he be kicking it in the goal?All he did was change the direction of the puck with his skate on an angle! Not a kicking motion! Not a whole lot different than using your stick to deflect the puck into the net instead of stopping the puck then shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to wear it out (even more) a lot of the criticism is factored around the supposed kicking motion when Ladd didn't even kick the puck into the goal as the second angle shot clearly shows.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ5C0FYl7R0''>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ5C0FYl7R0' target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ5C0FYl7R0[/post]

Good angle and hopefully that brings the question to a close. Poor Ladd, can't even enjoy a two-goal night b/c he was another casualty of the late 3rd period near meltdown that also cost him the GWG. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...