Canadiens 3, Islanders 0: But Mother Nature gets last laugh
If the Isles couldn't beat the Habs, at least Mother Nature is giving them a good kick in the teeth.
This isn't good. The Islanders powerplay continues to look anemic, the penalty kill continues to look lost, and while Jaroslav Halak made some stellar saves tonight, to call it a 40-save shutout is to flatter the quality of most of the Islanders' shots, which generally came from outside, through zero traffic, or -- when point blank -- with an eye for Halak's torso. Halak played quite well; the Islanders shot quite poorly. It was a shutout earned by both parties.
At the other end, Martin Biron should probably have a complex right about now, because his teammates have scored 12 times at 5-on-5 for him all year, while he and the boys have conceded 25. The increasingly disastrous penalty kill has been particularly awful for him, too, conceding 18 times, including all three goals tonight.
Game Sum. | Event Sum. | Recaps: nhl.com | Isles | Gazette
More to come about the game, but first a rant...
Best 'One-Trick Enforcers are Rather Worthless' Moment of the Night
Yeah, take away the instigator rule and I guess you could say six-minute man Georges Laraque could have attacked Andy Sutton for having the audacity to throw clean hip checks at the blueline. Instead, Laraque challenged Sutton to fight at the end of a (Sutton) shift, and #25 wisely declined. It's just not worth it and it's not necessary. Sutton wasn't throwing head shots and he wasn't endangering people's careers. He was throwing the hard bodychecks that the Don Cherrys and Mike "Strawman Argument" Milburys of the world pretend would somehow disappear if you looked into hits to the head.
The way you deal with that is by hitting back, not by pretending a guy who serves an actual hockey function should sit for five minutes just so a guy who serves no purpose other than sitting for five minutes can try to pummel him.
(Sorry, if I hear one more delusional hockey fan claim that the desire to look at concussions comes from people who "want hitting out of the game" -- or as Milbury called his straw men last night, "crunchy granola types," I'm going to flip. These people aren't worth listening to, they're impossible to debate because they package their outrage in an argument against a foe that doesn't exist (hello Straw!), and they don't even know what they're defending other than their own fear of change. Tell me you don't think the league can enforce rules right. Tell me you simply like concussions the way they are. Tell me you like MMA. Just don't tell me there are serious fans trying to remove hitting from the game, and don't tell me -- nor Andy Sutton -- that addressing headshots would remove the ability to body check.
Last night on Hot Stove Milbury actually compared debilitating brain injuries to his own knee replacement: "It happens." If one had anything to do with the other, 30 years ago the league would have mandated titanium orbs around every player's knee instead of requiring every new player wear a helmet. But see -- stop me if you've heard this -- turns out your brain is actually a pretty big deal. Even a bigger deal than a knee, shockingly. As Milbury demonstrates, being deficient in both departments. Talk about a village missing its idiot.)
Whoa, wait, where was I? Oh yeah: Laraque. '80s goon entertainment be damned (I was there, it was fun while it lasted), these one-trick enforcers simply aren't much of a factor anymore. They only fight each other and they bring nothing else to the table as hockey players -- not at this level. I've long since accepted you can't really disentangle fighting from the NHL game. I've also long since concluded it makes more sense for hockey players to fight other hockey players, rather than having Designated Testosterone Release junkies dress up as NHL hockey players to do nothing but give up 5-on-5 goals and fight each other to justify their place for five minutes of ice time a night.
So given that philosophical stance, yes, I was quite pleased to see Laraque's call go unanswered. Talk to me when Sutton does something worth fighting about, and then I'll call him out if he doesn't "answer the bell."
Game Highlights
The Powerplay: Still Weightless
So the Isles held John Tavares out of an early powerplay because, as they told Hockey Night in Canada, he wasn't moving his feet. He looked a little more alive later, but he was just one of several on the unit who didn't create enough traffic nor generating enough dangerous shots. It should be noted that the best chance -- a Halak blocker-side robbery of Matt Moulson -- was set up by a great Tavares pass.
It's a tired refrain that the Isles extra-man unit misses Doug Weight, but they do. Rob Schremp (6:18 on the PP), who looked good on the powerplay a few games ago, hasn't helped create much the last few nights. With some lineup decisions around the corner, I wonder how much longer he'll get if he doesn't ignite something in that role. But it's hard to pick on him when no one is scoring.
The Penalty Kill: What's Up?
With one-sixth of the game spent on the Islanders powerplay, ice time was low for some low-skill guys like Jon Sim and Brendan Witt. Witt only saw 10:35 of ice time, including 2:21 of PK time. He was on for the first goal (not his fault -- in fact, his last-dictch dive almost bailed out his teammates), but the other two goals were scored against the Sutton and Jack Hillen pairing, with Richard Park and Nate Thompson also out there.
So I'll ask what I asked in the game thread: What do you make of the PK? It was pretty solid the first month of the season. It's been barely above 50% (14 goals in 31 opportunities) in the last 8 games. So do you make of it a slump? Good luck early in the year meets bad luck now? Or are Park and Thompson and the blueliners behind them not as determined now that the early season hunger or job competition has receded? Or have the "most important penalty killers" -- the goalies -- just not stolen saves like they need to?
I didn't find Biron terribly at fault on any of the goals tonight, though I am still waiting to see the game-stealing form that tells me, "Oh yeah, you're a #1." I did find the Canadiens PP unit -- buoyed by the return of quarterback Andrei Markov, who potted two -- moved the puck around entirely too easily.
Scott Gordon's Take
Here's Scott Gordon, responding to questions about his special teams, which couldn't handle the Habs' approach, as well as the play of Biron. Gordon said "at 5-on-5, I don't think they were in the same ballgame" -- and if you look at the Corsi tally for the night, you'd think he has a point: Not a single Islander was on the ice for more 5-on-5 shot attempts against Biron than shot attempts at Halak.
December Swoon?
It's been brought up before, and it was brought up last night -- an amusing reset of my jinx-defying "surely they won't go 10 games without a win again" -- so it's worth noting the Isles are 3-6 so far this month. Worse than any Julian calendar-marked demarcations, though, is the fact they've been shut out twice and are 1-3 at home, losing by a combined 12 goals in those three losses. For the brave fans who drove out in a blizzard to endure the invasion of Habs fans last night, that's a crappy reward.
Bottom Line
The Islanders are still a team that's relying on a lot of young, green players to be their best players, while looking to some long-in-the-tooth and/or marginal vets to fill out the rest. Two of their top four defensemen are Jack Hillen and Andrew MacDonald, which is a lot to ask. Not a single player who is looked upon to score has been around the block in this league. This is the recipe for some pain that, I think, most of us expected. As luck (and tradition?) would have it, we're getting a heavy dose of that pain this holiday season.
But one day Kyle Okposo will score again, Park will bury his shorthanded breakaway, Moulson will return to putting those point-blank shots inside the post instead of into the goalie, and Frans Nielsen will bury his chance in front instead of pass to no one. That's the idea, anyway.
0 recs |
16 comments
|
Comments
Milbury
Facepalm. I swear, Why he is given a mic is beyond me. Yes, you know you might need to replace hips/knees and other joints if you play hockey or other sports. But you don’t expect to be like some of these NFL players who are 45 and walking around in Alzheimer land. I’ve been against banning hits to the head, and maybe we can improve the helmets. But how can you argue when its doctors making these statements?
I’d rather see an improvement in the helmet area then to ban shots to the head, but I’d rather they ban shots to the head (especially if they can’t improve helmets) then to have players I like be brain damaged at 48 years old.
BTW, shouldn’t Milbury be an example of a mind tainted by hits to the head?
I don’t think this is a December swoon persay. I just think this is going to be an up and down team. We’re back down like we were earlier in the season. We just aren’t finding ways to tie the game now.
"So basically, the Stats make no sense whatsoever."
Not only that, but you think Milbury would be more aware of it considering that Brett Lindros retired during his time as GM. Say what you will about Brett and maybe not being ready for the NHL and not keeping his head up, but its still sad to see any career ended early by a multitude of concussions. And yes, I do realize I’ve made more then a few Brett Lindros jokes.
"So basically, the Stats make no sense whatsoever."
I didnt see any of this Mike stuff- I was watching Howie and Jaffe.
I guess thats a good thing lol.
Let Us Go, Islanders!
(Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
by TheMetalChick on Dec 20, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
Oh yes, you were lucky. Sometimes I must watch, like a carwreck. I don’t care much what he says, but since I know HNIC/Hot Stove will be a topic anyway, I flip over to see it first-hand and get it over with.
Lighthouse Hockey: Eyes on Tavares, mug full of Moulson.
Jaw
Problem with helmet improvements is, some of the experts are saying hits to the jaw, which many of the blindside head shots are, actually are causing the concussions. If that’s true, an improved helmet will only help when the head hits the ice after said jaw hit. Of course, that’s still better than nothing but, only disallowing head shots will help reduce concussions.
Also, I think many old timers remember the past differently than it actually occurred. Meaning they remember being young and fast and playing physical. But, if you ever put yesteryear’s game footage against today’s, you’d see today’s players are bigger, faster and thus they hit harder. Even if a yesteryear player hit dirty or high, he wasn’t moving as fast as they do now and they weren’t as big as they are now. So, any argument that starts with, “Well in my day…” is to me irrelevant. Plus, the player being hit is also traveling faster so, the impact grows exponentially. If you got in your delorian and went to 1975 and picked up a player like Milbury, brought him BACK TO THE FUTURE and placed him in a game today, it would be comical. He wouldn’t be fast enough or skilled enough to make the AHL roster. Being slow he wouldn’t hit many people either as they’d skate right by him. And if he happened to find himself rushing up ice ( I’m trying not to laugh here,) and got caught by one of these blindside head hits, he’d be dead. Seriously, these guys don’t realize how much MORE dangerous it is now. Same goes for football and all sports really. Modern training regiments create beasts of men forever getting faster, stronger and more scary.
"I'm gonna hire you as my latex salesman? I don't think so. Why would I do that?"
"Vandelay! Say Vandelay Industries!"
"And you wanna be my latex salesman?"
But, if you ever put yesteryear’s game footage against today’s, you’d see today’s players are bigger, faster and thus they hit harder. Even if a yesteryear player hit dirty or high, he wasn’t moving as fast as they do now and they weren’t as big as they are now.
That’s my biggest beef with the old timer’s “back in my day” argument. No offense to them, but they really don’t have a clue what the speed and force is like today. Old footage doesn’t look that far off from today’s better beer leagues — including the hilarious lack of backchecking.
I’m not in favor of a blanket “head contact” ban. There are many situations where head contact is incidental or almost unavoidable. Given the science that is being collected about long-term consequences, I do think they can alter rules to make serious head injuries less common — and “blind-side” hits that have nothing to do with separating player from puck are a good place to start.
Mostly what I favor is investigating and debating the issue, which is where the Milburys of the world are at their most disgusting. They don’t want it to be discussed. They don’t want it brought up. They don’t want anyone touching the sacred fabrication in their head of some static, unchanging game called “hockey” that, unlike the rest of the world, is somehow immune to the health, bodybuilding and technological advances of the last 50 years.
Lighthouse Hockey: Eyes on Tavares, mug full of Moulson.
Tambellini
I guess he hasnt produced this season…
The kid does everything asked of him. Does it well and then
PERMA-BENCH
this team is losing me
A metaphor this team really needs to embrace.....
…..very often, I’ll read an interview where is dug up an anecdote of some band’s having to play for an audience of about, oh, six people – but play and play well they did despite the very thin support, because they’re…..PROFESSIONALS. What IS it about athletes – most, anyhow – that their performance is SO profoundly affected by low attendance, even under such circumstances as blizzard conditions? It seems to to me indicative of their lacking both pride and integrity – and in the case of JT, JB & others, young or not, though none of them seem to be very callow at all…..
I was talking over the summer about how this season really is about Gordon
My take on the teams fortunes and successes really is just based on the fact that this season the team is better than last years. As far as the coach goes I’m not certain that much of this is attributed to him.
Few things of note
1) Gordon rarely gets on the refs when they make bad calls. Many a nights he seems like he is in over his head when a series of successive bad calls are made. His face just says it all. Lots of successful coaches in this league refuse to stand for that. I recall a game against St Louis a few years back where we were the beneficiaries of a few 5-3s in the first period. Murray laid into the refs for the remainder of the 1st period. On the way to the gates when the period ended he was still talking to the refs.
The Isles were at home in this one. Murray was able to turn a road game where the home team gets the benefit of the doubt into a home game for St Louis. Little fire from the coach goes a long way to the team. It says, “I’m behind you guys!!!”
2) Once again it looks like Gordon has to make adjustments to his system. There’s nothing wrong with, when you scorers go cold and things aren’t working defensivly, going with a trap for a stretch of games. The emphasis in that system is still on forchecking and controlling the neutral zone. Biggest problem with the Isles, and it doesn’t show up in the shot totals, is the fact that they have done a poor job of establishing control in the neutral zone. Opposing teams just skate on through as this team, as weak as it is defensivly, just caves territory.
Switching back into his overspeed system over time would be a lot easier.
Overall, I’m not gonna lie and say I was all about hiring Gordon in the first place. I think it’s a very hard thing to rebuild your roster as well as have the coach learn the ropes on this level at the same time. My preference has always been for younger players to have someone who has seen some battles on the level. Or at least someone who has been through something like this elsewhere.
Personally I was hoping Snow would go with an old Quebec Nordiques associate in Pierre Page. This isn’t to say that I think this stretch should be entirely blamed on Gordon. For the month to go this bad there are things he can do though.
There’s nothing wrong with, when you scorers go cold and things aren’t working defensivly, going with a trap for a stretch of games. The emphasis in that system is still on forchecking and controlling the neutral zone.
I’m not against this as far as temporary in-game shifts, and I’d be curious to see if Gordon — now that he has his system reasonably in place/everyone on the same page — could demonstrate in-game adjustments that his players would actually execute.
But only against better teams. Last night, against a weaker team, I don’t think the neutral zone was much of an issue at all. The Habs’ best chances 5-on-5 were on turnovers that created odd-man rushes, plus a few times when they hemmed the Isles in and got penalties out of it. Otherwise, it was a game where the Habs scored powerplay goals and the Isles didn’t, and the Isles couldn’t finish their 5-on-5 chances.
As far as trapping for a full stretch of games, I guess it’s a philosophical difference. I suppose it could steal them some extra OTLs and shootout wins (I’m assuming it would make a snakebitten team garner even fewer scoring chances). But I don’t want them to trap their way to mediocrity. If this season is a write-off anyway, I’d rather him keep instilling his style of play into the young guys who are going to be here a while. Go down swinging rather than go down Lemaire-era Wild-ing.
Lighthouse Hockey: Eyes on Tavares, mug full of Moulson.
Enforcer
Can’t agree with your rant against enforcers. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not happy to see a fight, just less excited to see dirty players take liberties with our young talent and not worry about paying for it. I was glad to see Sutton turn down five min. in the box. But Pronger should have had his head removed and shoved up his back side for his run at Tavares. And Dion Pheneuf should have had a few extra bruises after his rekless hit on K.O. And if your lucky enough to have one of the rare heavy weights who is capable of playing a little hockey youv’e got a real asset (a la Clark Gillies). If not you use a roster spot on a one trick pony who plays less than five min. most nights. Other wise risk having the career of one of your young stars cut short because there is no price to pay to take runs at them.
I don’t mind the whole “make sure no on takes liberties” bit — I agree, that’s an important part of the game when things get crazy. I just don’t see it effectively being taken care of by the Brashears of the world. They only fight each other. They look lost out there because they can’t instigate (and can’t play, typically). And they take up a roster spot and screw up the fourth line, since the coach rarely has the confidence to roll four lines with them.
I agree Pronger should have his teeth knocked in, but I haven’t seen a single team do that to him — one-trick enforcer or not — so I don’t think that’s the missing ingredient that’s keeping it from happening.
Lighthouse Hockey: Eyes on Tavares, mug full of Moulson.
Yeah, I’d say after years of watching him, the evidence points to the contrary. He is sneaky, though. I’m not sure who on the Isles saw his Tavares hit, just like a lot of times in his history someone’s writhing in pain while Pronger’s skating off acting like the blameless child.
Lighthouse Hockey: Eyes on Tavares, mug full of Moulson.
Pronger would run on a Ref if he had a half a chance to get away with it.
Come to think of it, I wonder how I could convince Prong-hole to go after Koharski?
SHOOOOOOOT!!!! Anon
by burpchelischili on Dec 21, 2009 1:14 PM EST up reply actions

by 





























