clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Islanders News: Battle of New York reactions

Let's relive last night some more, eh?

"Hey, smell my finger."
"Hey, smell my finger."
Bruce Bennett

The New York Islanders and Carolina Hurricanes are tied for second place in the Metropolitan Division with 4-5-3 records. Heavens, the Isles better take advantage of how putrid this division has been before the opportunity's passed them by.

Last night was one such opportunity, but the Isles fell short in a Metro tilt for the second consecutive game. More on that one:

  • Newsday's Rangers angle has Ryan McDonagh: "This is a very intense building all the time when we play this team. It's an easy game to get up for, a game that obviously is a battle to the very end."
  • Newsday's Isles angle with Thomas Vanek: "The atmosphere was great -- I haven't been in a game like that for a long time," said Vanek, who played 19:49. "Our line was OK. We're still trying to feel our way a little bit."
  • In the Post, John Tavares disagrees with the panicky Internet: "I don’t think too much went wrong. Just a couple mistakes, and when we got our chances, we didn’t finish enough. Not a lot of difference, but that’s what these games are like."
  • Uh oh, Thomas Hickey too! [IPB]: "We had some great goaltending. They made some big saves. A bounce here or there, we get the win, but it’s not going to be easy to start getting those bounces."
  • The Times quotes Jack Capuano: "We’re not poised enough with the puck," Capuano said. "We’re making the same mistakes too often."
  • Daily News: It marked the second time in three games that the Blueshirts overcame a 2-1 deficit after two periods. (The Red Wings were the previous victim, though Twitter tells me good teams never let this happen.)
  • On the Metro: So Exactly How Bad Is the Metropolitan Division Right Now? - In Lou We Trust
  • Really fun read of a Leafs fan's memory of the '82 Stanley Cup final.
  • Hey, did you hear the Vanek deal was a statement? [Gross]
  • Bridgeport's problems are sometimes similar to the parent club, but not this one: Their special teams have been awful.

I can't believe we forgot to post this 30 Rock "trade Moulson" bit amid all the Moulson trade coverage. A helpful reader gave us the necessary kick:


Finally, this is amazingly convoluted and bad. No wonder the kick rule appears to be applied with no consistency whatsoever (Never forget Aucoin.):

The criteria are provided by Murphy are as follow: "1. Was there a distinct kicking motion? 2. Did the distinct kicking motion propel the puck into the net? 3. What direction was the skate/ player facing? 4. Did the puck have enough inertia/ force to go into the net on its own and the skate just changed the direction of the puck? 5. Did the skate just change the direction of the puck?"

Regarding the call on Miller, who had the puck carom in off his skate as he attempted to get his stick on a rebound while driving to the net with speed from the left side, Murphy wrote: "Miller’s review was: distinct kicking motion, propelled the puck, skate was facing the net, the puck had no inertia in the direction of the net; the skate provide the inertia."

Regarding the call on Galchenyuk, who was also driving to the net but appeared to slow down/stop in attempting to handle a two-on-one pass, Murphy wrote: "We felt the puck hit his skate and went in the net. There was no distinct kicking motion, the puck had force/inertia of its own, Galchenyuk was attempting to control the pass." Murphy also added the league sends difficult reviews to a group of eight or nine GM’s, "to get their feedback to be sure we are clear in the direction they are giving us."

Yeah, okay.

More from Lighthouse Hockey: