What We Learned: Many lessons from an Islanders win
Tonight's Capitals preview will be up later, but -- at the risk of over-milking a win -- a few things came out of Wednesday's game that might tell us something about the direction of things. Chickendirt's FanPost addressed this idea yesterday (and those are always encouraged; I'm just the DJ, you're the rapper); I wanted to bring up a few more specifics:
Faceoffs: Yet another big game -- the Islanders won 64%. I'm starting to believe this is real. Scott Gordon credited Scott Allen for his work with the centers. If that's legit, then hooray for being able to hire your own coaches.
Physical Initiative:
"We’re too easy a team to play against in these types of games," Tortorella said. "We didn’t answer, as far as hitting back."
And he rued the team’s lack of scoring in Gaborik’s absence: "We cannot depend on having Gabby back in and have him carry this team offensively," he said. "You’re not going to win many games scoring one goal."
That may be more about the opponent's style and inability to deal with their superstar's first absence, but it told me something about the Islanders' capacity to get teams off their game. The Islanders came out physically dominating the Rangers -- Henrik Lundqvist remarked how, "They were really hungry ... you could feel it." And while the Rangers tried to answer back at the beginning of the 2nd, that only went so far.
Penalty Kill: Speaking of which, the Rangers' physical response drew a few 2nd-period powerplays, which allowed the Isles PK (now 9th at 82.5%) to shine...
"The coaches told us in our meeting that they were going to press us, but we didn't seem to be ready for it," said Callahan. "Gabby is obviously a huge part of the PP but we can't rely on him to do it all."
Special teams in this league are a matter of constant adjustment. When you get on a roll, teams see what you're doing and try to adjust. So you need a backup plan for the teams who adjust successfully. But for one night, with the Rangers missing Gaborik, the Islanders were able to unsettle the opponent's powerplay perfectly.
Powerplay: That unit is ranked 15th, at 21.4%. Doug Weight's return made a visible difference -- not only allowing Okposo to move down low, adding Weight's passing to the point, but also freeing Mark Streit to be more of a threat. This is good. With Weight healthy, a PP with Streit plus Okposo and Tavares can do some damage.
Matt Moulson: He's for real. Smart hockey player. His role may change in the future, but he has a good shot, a nose for the net, and the courage to get there.
Scott Gordon Will Always Be Both Weird and Insightful about His Goalies:
I've said multiple times: I like Gordon's former goalie pedigree, because he uses terminology and description about his goalies' play that your average non-goalie coach cannot conjure. (Contrast this with Joel Quenneville, a good coach who is honest yet seems to view goalies with bemused curiosity befitting their crazy nature.) So from Gordon we get this:
"Dwayne was excellent tonight," Gordon said. " He tracked the puck well and had good rebound control. I sensed since that Buffalo game that he was coming around and it was good to see."
... yet we also get this:
My decision on who is going to play will factor in more than what happened the previous game. It could be who we are playing against, whether it’s back-to-back games, what the upcoming schedule is."
So, will it be Roloson or Martin Biron? Gordon said the next game's starter is informed "after the media leaves."
Why is he so coy about who he's starting in goal every night? Because he's a former goalie, that's why. And all goalies have a bit of the crazy in them.
Defensive Alignment: For the second consecutive game, Brendan Witt was the least-used defenseman. I'm afraid this is necessary, particularly if Andy Sutton is going to be Good Andy. If Radek Martinek stays healthy (yes, always a big IF), he becomes the most important shut-down guy, Streit remains the most important (and slightly less overworked) two-way guy, and Witt becomes a low pairing physical guy -- which is the best he can do in this system.
The Youth: Chris Botta reported that Gordon liked what he saw out of Josh Bailey: "Small gains in little areas." I agree. Bailey was a little more assertive on offense, displayed a harder shot, and looked more active. We shouldn't forget that he's 20, and his progress will not follow some smooth curve. Whichever anonymous scout ranted that "they're turning him into a third-liner" is -- like so many anonymous scouts -- just talking barroom smack. Careers seldom develop without bumps.
The Approach:
"That was KISS hockey - keep it simple stupid. Block shots, penalty kill, clog the lanes."
Later, Roloson said, "I don’t think anyone in this locker room was lacking any confidence." [snip]
"Sorry about the cliché, but you just try to give your guys a chance to win," Roloson said. "I wouldn’t have used a cliché if it wasn’t true."
Exactly. There are certain things Gordon is trying to instill for the long-term. And there are certain basic tenets that any coach instills to try to win hockey games night after night. Along with at least above-average goaltending, the Islanders will need those things to get their wins. Many times it won't be enough because an opponent's superior skill will be able to undo 40, or 50, or god-forbid-55 minutes of excellent Islanders work. But this is their slim margin of error: Do what Roloson mentioned, or fall. Unlike tonight's opponent, the Isles aren't talented enough to win games that "ring hollow."
No Really, You Can Talk about the Opponent:
Rangers Coach John Tortorella was getting progressively more irritated at reporters’ questions, until finally one brought up Tavares. That did it.
"I don’t
caregive a damn about John Tavares — I care about MY team," Tortorella said, and abruptly walked away. [quote fixed, thanks TMC]
I'm a Tortorella apologist; his honesty is refreshing. But this is where he is a bit of an ass. Newsday's Katie Strang has gone through the ritual of asking opposing coaches their impression of Tavares after seeing him (though this time it wasn't her, unless her voice dropped a few octaves). For the league's #1 pick, that's not exactly an unreasonable question. Come on, coach: Do your part to promote the league and stop taking it so personally.
* * *
Is this overreacting to an emotional win? I don't think so, but the points are certainly debatable -- so have at it. But for me, this is reflective of (my broken record) the Isles' thin margin of error: When healthy and in form, they should be capable of stealing wins from anyone. When any single bit breaks down, though, there is no individual franchise savior. Yet.
20 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’m trying to figure out if Gordon is taking it easier on the team in practice or if the team is becoming more conditioned. In the Rangers game it appeared that they drifted a little in the second to save some energy for the third. However they all seemed to be a little more energetic in the last period as of the last couple of games.
If they beat Tort’s team again I would love it if a reporter asked him, “What do you think of Tavares now?” Too bad fox doesn’t broadcast NHL anymore because their reporters had a knack for irritating players in interviews. I think it was deliberate but it sure was funny…especially when they would get on the Flyers’ nerves.
I don’t think it’s just a Fox thing. They guys networks unleash upon the unsuspecting players during intermissions are almost universally reviled, at least here in Canada. Scott Oake for CBC, Pierre McGuire for TSN (I guess he does Vs in the States too), Gene Principe for Oilers broadcasts on Sportsnet. The interviews almost always result in players tossing out tired cliches, but there are a few who really enjoy messing with the media guys. Check out just about any interview with Dustin Penner, for instance
Great clip. I’m all for players getting lippy with reporters when they recycle the same old crap.
I know players try not to say anything controversial or interesting, but it’s kind of a cycle that’s fed by the sideline guys orienting their questions just to fetch a soundbite.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
That was a great answer…
The fox reporters would aim to irritate some of the players though. I remember a reporter asking Lindros what was going through his mind when whatever team they were playing, scored the go ahead goal. The best part is that you knew he did it to get a rise out of him. The look he gave the reporter was priceless.
by metalcoconut on Oct 30, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
If they beat Tort’s team again I would love it if a reporter asked him, "What do you think of Tavares now?"
HA! Man, I would pay someone to ask him that.
Lets go Islanders...
by TheMetalChick on Oct 30, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Damn bowdlerization
“I don’t care about John Tavares — I only care about my team,” Tortorella said, and abruptly walked away.
Well, no. That isnt really what Torts said. The NY Times “niced” that quote up. What he actually said was “I don’t give a damn about John Tavares, I care about MY team.” You can see him say it right here:
http://www.newsday.com/video/newsday-video-1.1482431?idno=9945
I hate bowdlerization in any situation. And what exactly is the point of the change, NY Times- to make Torts look more reasonable and less upset lol? Or is the word ‘damn’ really THAT controversial?
Lets go Islanders...
Ooh, good catch — I watched that video and didn’t even realize they’d changed it.
…and fully agree on the silly clean up. They might as well quote him saying, “At this time Mr. Tavares is not a person who interests me. Only my squad is of particular interest.”
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
LOL!
They might as well quote him saying, "At this time Mr. Tavares is not a person who interests me. Only my squad is of particular interest."
LOL!!!!!! :D
“I appreciate the question, thank you for asking. However, at this juncture I feel that I am unable to extrapolate adequately on the astute skills of Mr. Tavares. My primary concern is the team with which I am employed. Are there any other questions?”
You know Scotts going to get asked about Ovechkin before, during, and after this game. Can you IMAGINE the uproar if he dished out the same kind of answer as Torts?
Lets go Islanders...
by TheMetalChick on Oct 30, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Indeed. Please-oh-please may it be in the form of, “How did you guys shut Ovechkin down?”
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Oct 30, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Great Catch!
I did not even see the video until just now. That is hysterical. I thought it was libel to change someone’s words withoug stating that you were paraphrasing.
by metalcoconut on Oct 30, 2009 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Not libel, just poor form. ;)
Which means, I suppose, they might have just mistakenly transcribed it (since he used “care” in the second clause), because normally they just throw brackets around the [dag-dern, mother-freaking] words they find objectionable.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
Roloson
Glad that he’s getting the start tonight, and Biron tomorrow against Buffalo. Going with the hot hand, Roloson, seems like a great move.
by Cal_IslandersFan on Oct 30, 2009 11:41 AM EDT reply actions
I hope he hasn’t removed his mask since Wednesday.
But I agree. We’ve got back-to-backs anyway, so give Roli a chance to shine again and let Biron impress in Buffalo.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
“Soooooo what did you think of Tim Jackman? Oh, that’s right he took out Gaborik…my bad.”
by metalcoconut on Oct 30, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions
my brother suggested that the Rangers would stick JT on the fourth line with Brashear...
to which I replied that we’d stick Mary Ann Gaborik on the Ice Girls—if he had the legs for it!!!

by 































