GDT R3G1 Capitals @ Lightning 2018-05-11 8:00pm EST NBCSN, CBC, SN, TVAS

[Maacoshark]

Backy isn't looking good for R3G2, still having trouble gripping his stick...


though one would think with his money he would have a nice attractive Swedish girl do it for him

    With us winning game one I doubt he plays game 2. He may have played if we lost. Who knows. Maybe the injury is worse than we think. He could be out for the remainder of the playoffs.

[RavenCp]

    With us winning game one I doubt he plays game 2. He may have played if we lost. Who knows. Maybe the injury is worse than we think. He could be out for the remainder of the playoffs.

When he ready he'll play, obviously he wasn't the last game. I don't think without him we are a better team. If managed to get by that's great. 

[BlackIce]

    14 minutes isn't excessive playing time for a guy playing on the 3rd line and getting some pp time. And I don't think all of those 14 minutes were by design. He took 2 or 3 extended shifts where his linemates changed and he didn't.

It isn't excessive -- but it isn't diminished, either.  It seems as though he wasn't at all protected (which luxury one has when the score is 4-0.)


As I said, I didn't see the game other than the highlights, but I'm wondering if some of those extended shifts were because he was the "chaser" to protect a line change.  When a line's shift ends with the other side having gained control of the puck but on their side of center ice, one person commonly dogs the puck carrier, trying to drive him back toward his goal and, ideally, behind it so that his line mates can get off safely and the replacements can get into position without the puck carrier being able to find a teammate hanging out at the Caps' blue line.  Then when the new line is in position the chaser peels off to the bench and the last change occurs.  This role is especially important in period 2 when the long changes occur.  Wilson is almost always in the chaser role for line 1.  Backstrom and Oshie share those duties on line 2 for the most part, with Oshie I think having the majority of the responsibility, though now with Stephenson on that line, he takes turns at this as well.  And Burakovsky, when he is on line 3, commonly handles chaser duties.  Line 4 rotates the most on this; Beagle, Smith-Pelly, or Chaisson might be the chaser in any particular situation -- whoever is most conveniently positioned.

[Maacoshark]

    I think he was the chaser on the one line change but after the change was complete, he didn't make the change when he had the chance. What I found odd was that Stephenson had a good game and he set up his team mates several times during that game but Burakovsky was pretty invisible on that line. He only had 1 shot on net and I don't think he had any quality scoring chances.

[BlackIce]

    I think he was the chaser on the one line change but after the change was complete, he didn't make the change when he had the chance. What I found odd was that Stephenson had a good game and he set up his team mates several times during that game but Burakovsky was pretty invisible on that line. He only had 1 shot on net and I don't think he had any quality scoring chances.

I wouldn't be surprised at Burakovsky not making much noise in his first game back.  As long as he played his part in the team defense (everybody seems to be raving about that, and if what they are raving about is true then there aren't guys one can complain about on defense, since team defense involves everybody.)


I thought it interesting that Tampa's weaknesses really got exposed in G1.  One that has been mentioned quite a bit are their PK difficulties, which the Caps certainly exploited.  But another weakness that hasn't been mentioned much is that Tampa was one of the league's worst on face-offs this year.  A clean win at the end of period 1 led directly to Ovie's goal.

[Stealyerfaceoff]

    Problem is that Vrana and Connolly should be watching most of the 3rd period too.

I respectfully suggest that you should roll four lines with a four goal lead and even when that lead gets whittled down to two goals.
I didn't see any egregiously poor play from anyone. No passengers please.

[DC_1908]

     I honestly feel Bura is our worst defensive forward. I think Vrana is even better than him. He scares me every time he is on the ice.

Yeah he and Connolly are about a toss up for being worthless on D.  Thioudh Connelly has more hockey IQ and instinct, he sure doesn’t use it for D.

[DC_1908]

I respectfully suggest that you should roll four lines with a four goal lead and even when that lead gets whittled down to two goals.
I didn't see any egregiously poor play from anyone. No passengers please.

On most teams I would completely agree.


However we have/had  weak defensive players on 2 lines, and two on one line.

[chas]

On most teams I would completely agree.


However we have/had  weak defensive players on 2 lines, and two on one line.

But you risk making the strong lines weak by giving them too many minutes and tiring them out.  Otherwise we could just play two defenseman the entire game.

[chas]

Agreed,  Ovie and the team are accepting playing more of a two-way game.


And it’s about goddamn time after 10 years.


As far as him being in the ice at the end like that . . . Eeehhhhh, it was risky.  Granted it’s better than putting Bura out there.

In order for Ovie to get some respect in the league he needs to do more than one timers on the power play.  It didn't seem that bad.  We dominated the third period with the exception of the first five or ten minutes.  There wasn't much concern.

[DC_1908]

But you risk making the strong lines weak by giving them too many minutes and tiring them out.  Otherwise we could just play two defenseman the entire game.

Which is why you shouldn’t put players that cant and/or will only play offense on your roster.  It’s a mute point if 18, or even just 15 skaters can shut down the enemy


As for just playing two Dman, we’ve played four forwards for 10 years and have a 10% score (one of 10) of winning 8 of 14 in that time

[DC_1908]

In order for Ovie to get some respect in the league he needs to do more than one timers on the power play.  It didn't seem that bad.  We dominated the third period with the exception of the first five or ten minutes.  There wasn't much concern.

You don’t dominate when you give up two goals.


That’s two failures when your up by two, that is in no way, shape,  or form, dominanting, let alone forgivable, or acceptable.


Allowing 2 goals is bad enough, but worse when your up by four.

[BlackIce]

You don’t dominate when you give up two goals.


That’s two failures when your up by two, that is in no way, shape,  or form, dominanting, let alone forgivable, or acceptable.


Allowing 2 goals is bad enough, but worse when your up by four.

So is the other team's giving up of four goals to us worthy of the death penalty?  Why are first goals somehow excusable, but later goals once someone has scored inexcusable?  Or are all goals inexcusable and the only righteous outcome would be that no one ever scores?


I would submit that giving up two goals (or three, see Pittsburgh G1) when you are up by two is absolutely worse than giving up two goals when you are up by four.

[DC_1908]

So is the other team's giving up of four goals to us worthy of the death penalty? Why are first goals somehow excusable, but later goals once someone has scored inexcusable?  Or are all goals inexcusable and the only righteous outcome would be that no one ever scores?


I would submit that giving up two goals (or three, see Pittsburgh G1) when you are up by two is absolutely worse than giving up two goals when you are up by four.

YES!!

This ain’t video games, or the co-ed Sunday night Red league at the Reston Ice Rink.

Maybe 5%, at most 10% of goals are scored by “skill”, the rest are defensive and/or goalie failures that should not be excused or tolerated by players or fans.


So what would your CEO, CFO, Director etc say if you told them 10% of the year/quarter/or month cost you 50% gain (ie 4-2), but it’s OK because you came out at least 50% ahead instead of the 100% expected or the 75% minimum accepted. . . ?

[Maacoshark]

    It is true that most goals come off some kind of error. Whether its a defensive breakdown or a bad goal by the goalie or a bit of both. I can understand Tampa's first goal since it was on the pp and the penalty wasnt a bad penalty. The 2nd goal really is unacceptable. You are up 4-1 late in the game and you give up an odd man rush. I'm not even sure which dman it was that got caught. Carlson was the guy back so I assume it was Kempny. Doesn't really matter who it was it was a play that never should have happened. That last goal was an example of being aggressive in the offensive zone when it isn't necessary.
    Maybe I am too critical but I am a firm believer in taking care of your own end first, the offense will take care if itself. When you have a 3 or 4 goal lead you don't need to take chances offensively. Just make the smart play.

[BlackIce]

    It is true that most goals come off some kind of error. Whether its a defensive breakdown or a bad goal by the goalie or a bit of both. I can understand Tampa's first goal since it was on the pp and the penalty wasnt a bad penalty. The 2nd goal really is unacceptable. You are up 4-1 late in the game and you give up an odd man rush. I'm not even sure which dman it was that got caught. Carlson was the guy back so I assume it was Kempny. Doesn't really matter who it was it was a play that never should have happened. That last goal was an example of being aggressive in the offensive zone when it isn't necessary.
    Maybe I am too critical but I am a firm believer in taking care of your own end first, the offense will take care if itself. When you have a 3 or 4 goal lead you don't need to take chances offensively. Just make the smart play.

Ah, the old conundrum.  How many times over the past years have we heard fans complain about the Caps sitting back too much with a lead to "try to take care of their own end first" and letting their opponents back into it?  Presumably there is some kind of undefined fine line where one continues to play aggressively, but not TOO aggressively.  That is a hard line to see, though, especially in a game as fast as hockey, and so sometimes the line is not adhered to.  And so guess what??  Sometimes mistakes are made.


I refuse to get into this mindset that all mistakes are inexcusable.  ALL sports are games infected by mistakes, because the players are human.  Baseball pitchers throw fat pitches all the time; and batters often take them, or foul them off when they should have hit them hard.  On virtually every football play somebody misses their block.  Basketball players blow defensive coverage or get too aggressive and let someone blow by them constantly.  Soccer, like hockey, is a game of turnovers.  Even the best golfers will typically hit several bad shots in a round.  And so it goes.  To point out a mistake on a particular play and castigate the offender as if there is something personally wrong with them because they didn't do the right thing is pointless, and flies in the face of basic human nature.

[DC_1908]

Ah, the old conundrum.  How many times over the past years have we heard fans complain about the Caps sitting back too much with a lead to "try to take care of their own end first" and letting their opponents back into it?  Presumably there is some kind of undefined fine line where one continues to play aggressively, but not TOO aggressively.  That is a hard line to see, though, especially in a game as fast as hockey, and so sometimes the line is not adhered to.  And so guess what??  Sometimes mistakes are made.


I refuse to get into this mindset that all mistakes are inexcusable.  ALL sports are games infected by mistakes, because the players are human.  Baseball pitchers throw fat pitches all the time; and batters often take them, or foul them off when they should have hit them hard.  On virtually every football play somebody misses their block.  Basketball players blow defensive coverage or get too aggressive and let someone blow by them constantly.  Soccer, like hockey, is a game of turnovers.  Even the best golfers will typically hit several bad shots in a round.  And so it goes.  To point out a mistake on a particular play and castigate the offender as if there is something personally wrong with them because they didn't do the right thing is pointless, and flies in the face of basic human nature.

The problem with the Caps “sitting back” is a great example:
Novice fans who don’t recognize why they do it,  find it boring because there’s no scoring

So DicklessPatrick creates teams to score for the novice fans

Then when it’s the correct and/or best strategy, the roster is not capable of doing it, so it doesn’t work and the other team scores.


So that won’t work so we have to play the video game style the novice want and we give up even more goals.

[Maacoshark]

Ah, the old conundrum.  How many times over the past years have we heard fans complain about the Caps sitting back too much with a lead to "try to take care of their own end first" and letting their opponents back into it?  Presumably there is some kind of undefined fine line where one continues to play aggressively, but not TOO aggressively.  That is a hard line to see, though, especially in a game as fast as hockey, and so sometimes the line is not adhered to.  And so guess what??  Sometimes mistakes are made.


I refuse to get into this mindset that all mistakes are inexcusable.  ALL sports are games infected by mistakes, because the players are human.  Baseball pitchers throw fat pitches all the time; and batters often take them, or foul them off when they should have hit them hard.  On virtually every football play somebody misses their block.  Basketball players blow defensive coverage or get too aggressive and let someone blow by them constantly.  Soccer, like hockey, is a game of turnovers.  Even the best golfers will typically hit several bad shots in a round.  And so it goes.  To point out a mistake on a particular play and castigate the offender as if there is something personally wrong with them because they didn't do the right thing is pointless, and flies in the face of basic human nature.

     I'm not a fan of taking high risks when you have a lead late in the game. In any sport I have always believed in taking care of the defense first and the offense will make cxare if itself. I'm not talking about physical mistakes. Those happen.  I'm talking about mental mistakes. Play the system and make smart plays. Especially when you are protecting a lead in the 3rd period. Don't get cute leaving the zone, make sure it gets out. And entering the offensive zone get the puck deep.

[Stealyerfaceoff]

Well this is the ECF and the bolts ain't the little sisters of the poor. You can't expect to win every game with a shut out.
Make less mistakes than the opposition and capitalize on their mistakes while hoping for the puck luck to go your way.
Looking for perfection? So far 1-0 so that's perfect. But I don't think there will be a sweep.

[chas]

Except for a few minutes in the beginning of the third Tampa simply could get past our trap.  For first part of the third, they pushed hard enough to move our trap back into our zone (or we played further back for some unknown reason).  But they couldn't sustain that push.

The Caps need to play the trap more than they have in the past because we are a weaker team defensively apparently.  It's effective.  It isn't flashy.  Why Tampa isn't doing the same and letting us carry the puck into their zone, I have no idea.