Post-Game Talk: Eastern Conference Final G1: Caps @ Bolts | 5/11/18 | 8:00pm EST

[stanleycaps18]

I thought Eller scored as well. If you look under the pad as the puck is going in, the puck is there, but NBC never blew up the shot the way they did for Pitt. I am glad it ended up not mattering, but still...

 

[artilector]

18-19-65 would not be a shutdown line. I think it would work really well actually.

19 needs to be surrounded by fast guys (in the current "meta" at least); 65 needs to be surrounded by smart guys. It's all on you, 18!

Anyhow, I'd like to see (better yet, keep seeing) the Caps with two fast guys on every line, (among other things) to do the leg-work for Ovi, Backstrom, and Oshie. It's not a coincidence, IMO, that these guys have ended up on different lines as the Caps have gotten faster. (Although I don't remember, did Backstrom play with Osh in his last game?)

Kuz has an iffy motor, too, but he can certainly go fast, and has been smart about picking his spots. Damn, imagine if Kuz had unlimited fuel for that afterburner -- he'd wreck teams.

 

[artilector]

That would force Nick in a shutdown role, and I'm not sure I want an injured superstar to be doing that.

To me, this is overthinking. Keep what's working, plug Backstrom in without disturbing things.
If there's some great concern about Backstrom, he shouldn't be playing -- at least not until things get dire.

 

[PuckBuddy]

That's very common after having chemo treatments.

Good for him getting back to it, but Liam McHugh and Jones need to stop leaving him flapping in the wind like that.

You gotta manage a guy's minutes coming back from LTIR.

 

[Jags]

Sure, they had a few fortuitous bounces offensively tonight but that's what happens when you believe and when you are the constant aggressor. Keep it going.

That's the thing about "lucky bounces" that rarely gets discussed: You have to put yourself in position to have that kind of break. The puck can't bounce your way if it's not bouncing at all.

Last year in Round 1 when the Leafs got all those crazy bounces and Caps fans were screaming at the hockey gods? That's what happens when you're throwing everything at the net, going for the long pass, and have the traffic and talent to make those things work out. We were always trying to force the clean, perfect shot, the highlight-reel scoring chance. You don't get bounces that way.

And in Round 2 last year, the Pens kept us out of the middle of the ice and we placed zero priority on getting traffic in front; the result being nothing but low-risk perimeter shots with no chance of deflections or rebounds. No bounces that way, either.

This year we're reversing those trends. And this style of play works for everyone, so it's more conducive to creating secondary scoring. Add to that the proactive play between the blues and we're playing far more in their end, too. And the result in 13 playoff games this year versus 13 last year is scoring is up 25% and goals against are down 10%.

TL;DR: If bounces are lucky, then create your own luck. It's not hard, and it works.

 

[txpd]

Lucky bounces. The Capitals have as deep a history of bounces and bad calls going against them as they do choking in the playoffs. One thing goes hand in hand with the other.
They always say that these things even out. If true, the Caps are due a lot of those things. Ov's whiff becoming Eller's ppg was one. Usually teams that win the Stanley Cup get more than their share of those things. More please

 

[Jags]

There is a big difference between turtling and an offensive push by your opponent. This wasnt even close to turtling. Really guys. Is that the only hockey term you know. Learn something new.

Condescending much? Insisting that you're the only one who knows what you're talking about is the reason you're cast as the villain on 3 separate Capitals forums.

Yes, it can get tiresome when fans that aren't hockey savvy rely on platitudes to diagnose things they don't understand. But that's not what's happening here. This isn't the official forum or its castoff cousin. The hockey IQ here is much higher.

The Caps turtled at the start of the third last night. It was a choice. We cut back dramatically on the forecheck, stopped backchecking as hard to cover the point, and were chipping it out to get fresh legs on instead of playing anything resembling a strong possession or transition game. It was NOT in any way just TB asserting themselves, pressing and overwhelming us.

We came out for the third with an obvious, huge change in our gameplan. If you didn't see that, then it's your hockey IQ that needs work.

Maybe they use the word "turtle" here a bit too much. Can't say that I've noticed it, but maybe. But it was not even a little out of place last night. What they called turtling was absolutely turtling.

 

[shelco]

7 more boys

 

[Ajax1995]

We came out for the third with an obvious, huge change in our gameplan.

I guess that depends on what you mean by huge. In your opinion on a 100 point scale with 50/50 being right down the middle between emphasis on offense and defense what were they doing in the first 2 periods and what did they start the 3rd period with? And with a 4 goal lead going into the 3rd what kind of change in emphasis should a team have, if any?

 

[txpd]

I am figuring Backstrom is not playing until I see him in the lineup.

That said Backstrom has been the shut down center all along. If he is playing I would expect him to be user that way

 

[Jags]

I guess that depends on what you mean by huge. In your opinion on a 100 point scale with 50/50 being right down the middle between emphasis on offense and defense what were they doing in the first 2 periods and what did they start the 3rd period with? And with a 4 goal lead going into the 3rd what kind of change in emphasis should a team have, if any?

"Huge" has its own meaning.

Systems in hockey aren't as linear as saying, "We're focusing 50% on offense and 50% on defense," and then, later, "Okay, let's go 75% D." There's no simple explanation for the change, but if I had to try, here's an oversimplification:

Periods 1 and 2: A nuanced, proactive approach in both ends that emphasized pursuit -- heavy forecheck and backcheck, yielding possession for us and disruption for them.

Start of Period 3: "Come at me, bro."

We collapsed around our own net, tried to give them only bad looks and low-risk opportunities, chipped it out instead of transitioning with possession, focusing more on platooning fresh legs on than dictating play and challenging them in all phases. We switched from proactive to reactive hockey, daring a team that punches well to punch us. We went from dominating and breaking their spirit to basically inviting their players and fans to get back into it.

That seems huge to me. Your mileage may vary.

Should we have let up with a 4-goal lead? The gung-ho among us would shout "No!" But yeah, you should switch things up a bit. Make adjustments, but stick with what's working.

 

[Holtbyisms]

I'm predicting a game 3 Backstrom return when we head home 2-0.

 

[maacoshark]

Condescending much? Insisting that you're the only one who knows what you're talking about is the reason you're cast as the villain on 3 separate Capitals forums.

Yes, it can get tiresome when fans that aren't hockey savvy rely on platitudes to diagnose things they don't understand. But that's not what's happening here. This isn't the official forum or its castoff cousin. The hockey IQ here is much higher.

The Caps turtled at the start of the third last night. It was a choice. We cut back dramatically on the forecheck, stopped backchecking as hard to cover the point, and were chipping it out to get fresh legs on instead of playing anything resembling a strong possession or transition game. It was NOT in any way just TB asserting themselves, pressing and overwhelming us.

We came out for the third with an obvious, huge change in our gameplan. If you didn't see that, then it's your hockey IQ that needs work.

Maybe they use the word "turtle" here a bit too much. Can't say that I've noticed it, but maybe. But it was not even a little out of place last night. What they called turtling was absolutely turtling.

I disagree. Yes the Caps have turtled few times this year. I don't think last night was one of them. And the term is used here every game. It is overused. Definitely the mist overused term on the Caps board.

 

[maacoshark]

I'm predicting a game 3 Backstrom return when we head home 2-0.

I like your optimism.

 

[maacoshark]

"Huge" has its own meaning.

Systems in hockey aren't as linear as saying, "We're focusing 50% on offense and 50% on defense," and then, later, "Okay, let's go 75% D." There's no simple explanation for the change, but if I had to try, here's an oversimplification:

Periods 1 and 2: A nuanced, proactive approach in both ends that emphasized pursuit -- heavy forecheck and backcheck, yielding possession for us and disruption for them.

Start of Period 3: "Come at me, bro."

We collapsed around our own net, tried to give them only bad looks and low-risk opportunities, chipped it out instead of transitioning with possession, focusing more on platooning fresh legs on than dictating play and challenging them in all phases. We switched from proactive to reactive hockey, daring a team that punches well to punch us. We went from dominating and breaking their spirit to basically inviting their players and fans to get back into it.

That seems huge to me. Your mileage may vary.

Should we have let up with a 4-goal lead? The gung-ho among us would shout "No!" But yeah, you should switch things up a bit. Make adjustments, but stick with what's working.

You do realize when a team is putting pressure on your defense sometimes the only option is to chip it out. You guys think you have all the answers. When a team us trailing in the 3rd they are going to take more chances especially dmen pinching not allowing their opponent to use their transition game and forcing them to chip it out. You cant stick with what was working earlier because your opponent has completely changed their game plan.

 

[Ajax1995]

"Huge" has its own meaning.

Systems in hockey aren't as linear as saying, "We're focusing 50% on offense and 50% on defense," and then, later, "Okay, let's go 75% D." There's no simple explanation for the change, but if I had to try, here's an oversimplification:

Periods 1 and 2: A nuanced, proactive approach in both ends that emphasized pursuit -- heavy forecheck and backcheck, yielding possession for us and disruption for them.

Start of Period 3: "Come at me, bro."

We collapsed around our own net, tried to give them only bad looks and low-risk opportunities, chipped it out instead of transitioning with possession, focusing more on platooning fresh legs on than dictating play and challenging them in all phases. We switched from proactive to reactive hockey, daring a team that punches well to punch us. We went from dominating and breaking their spirit to basically inviting their players and fans to get back into it.

That seems huge to me. Your mileage may vary.

Should we have let up with a 4-goal lead? The gung-ho among us would shout "No!" But yeah, you should switch things up a bit. Make adjustments, but stick with what's working.

IMO sure they sat back some going into the 3rd but up 4 I would want them to to a point also. Tampa came at them hard because they had to. What were they going to continue to do what they were doing in the first 2 periods when they generated 10 whole shots?

The Caps weathered the storm just fine. Sure they gave up a couple goals but they had more than enough to play with. Acting like this is some travesty and not something every other team in any sport would do is silly. The Caps had it, they weren’t panicking, just because many of their ‘demanding’ fans were. This is complaining just to complain IMO.

 

[hockeykicker]

 

[g00n]

You do realize when a team is putting pressure on your defense sometimes the only option is to chip it out. You guys think you have all the answers. When a team us trailing in the 3rd they are going to take more chances especially dmen pinching not allowing their opponent to use their transition game and forcing them to chip it out. You cant stick with what was working earlier because your opponent has completely changed their game plan.

You think people don't understand this? That this is all they mean by turtling?

Turtling is figuratively going into a shell for protection. You stop being aggressive, whether it's executing a defensive gameplan or whatever. It's not moving your feet and just trying to poke the puck from a distance. It's lazily flipping the puck away from the net without thinking about what you're doing. It's dumping and changing arbitrarily to keep shifts short when protecting a small lead despite either numbers or a mismatch that could lead to scoring. It's killing the clock in the offensive zone with bad cycling. It's getting away from what got you the lead even if the other team hasn't really adjusted and dictated play.

People here don't say "turtle" when they mean play a tight defensive game with good execution in order to stop a surging defense. They say it when the team falls back on its heels and stops being aggressive in hopes they can run out the clock.

No wonder you think you're smarter than everyone else here.

 

[txpd]

I'm predicting a game 3 Backstrom return when we head home 2-0.

Based on what?

 

[Hivemind]

Based on what?

txMD calling for sources on medical diagnoses? What is happening

 

[Langway]

Watched a replay of this one. Early on, Tampa Bay did chip the puck in on their first three or four entries so they did know what they were up against. They just didn't have enough discipline or intensity but they did have a decent start for the first five minutes or so. Chiasson probably was their worst player even outside of the penalties so Walker wouldn't be a bad idea. I really doubt Walker would PK but against this opponent with his legs he may match up alright. I was surprised to see that Djoos only played 8:52, particularly given the lead that they had and that I didn't notice any real struggles on his part. I thought Niskanen in particular looked a bit sluggish in the third period and that impacted his gap control and ability to contest entries. Being able to sustain their level of play in terms of dominant positioning may be a tall order. They need to continue to be able to create and finish chances when they're there. Stephenson did a really good job of turning defense to offense and they'll need more of it. I expect they'll attack with much more determination in Game 2 but their defense and PK should present opportunities.

 

[Ovechkins Wodka]

I think Backstrom does have a broken hand and we will play when needed. As long as we are winning he can sit and heal, I know he hates this and wants back on the ice.
I've played with a broken thumb in a cast before, it's not a big deal. But mine was my bottom hand and not the top hand in Backstroms case.

 

[Emerica]

I'm happy for ya'll. If there's a team and fans that deserves to be there it's you guys and Winnipeg. Hoping for a WSH-WPG finals.

 

[HTFN]

You do realize when a team is putting pressure on your defense sometimes the only option is to chip it out. You guys think you have all the answers. When a team us trailing in the 3rd they are going to take more chances especially dmen pinching not allowing their opponent to use their transition game and forcing them to chip it out. You cant stick with what was working earlier because your opponent has completely changed their game plan.

You think you have all the answers too, hasn't stopped you from being wrong plenty of times. Take a moment, remember you're not the board appointed "expert" either, and take yourself down a peg or three. You would think that you'd have learned some humility after the crow you were willing to choke down (and good for you for doing so unprompted, for what it's worth) by the end of the last series....

In this case, it's not about chipping the puck, it's about the lack of pursuit and support after the chip. That's the turtle, right there. When you've decided that X goals is "enough", and outside of the chances that fall directly into your team's lap, you're not interested in creating any more. Believe it or not, you can actually defend a lead without having to play in the defensive zone. Get pucks in deep, support them, stifle their breakout, basically do all the same things the Capitals were doing through two periods. They can't score if they don't have the puck, playing the game like it's still 0-0 is another way to win.

Forcing them to take desperate penalties down late, instead of adopting a reactive, defensive game that could force Capitals into taking penalties instead. Don't give them an entire third period to analyze and pick apart your team's defensemen, avoid epiphany moments where they suddenly solve a goaltender, etc.

You can win games that way. They won Game 6 in Pittsburgh that way.

 

[maacoshark]

You think you have all the answers too, hasn't stopped you from being wrong plenty of times. Take a moment, remember you're not the board appointed "expert" either, and take yourself down a peg or three. You would think that you'd have learned some humility after the crow you were willing to choke down (and good for you for doing so unprompted, for what it's worth) by the end of the last series....

In this case, it's not about chipping the puck, it's about the lack of pursuit and support after the chip. That's the turtle, right there. When you've decided that X goals is "enough", and outside of the chances that fall directly into your team's lap, you're not interested in creating any more. Believe it or not, you can actually defend a lead without having to play in the defensive zone. Get pucks in deep, support them, stifle their breakout, basically do all the same things the Capitals were doing through two periods. They can't score if they don't have the puck, playing the game like it's still 0-0 is another way to win.

Forcing them to take desperate penalties down late, instead of adopting a reactive, defensive game that could force Capitals into taking penalties instead. Don't give them an entire third period to analyze and pick apart your team's defensemen, avoid epiphany moments where they suddenly solve a goaltender, etc.

You can win games that way. They won Game 6 in Pittsburgh that way.

I don't have all the answers but I am not second guessing the game plan the coaches put in place.
For people that think the Caps turtled, the first goal Tampa scored was on the pp. The 2nd goal we gave up an odd man rush because we got too aggressive in the offensive zone when it went necessary. That us the exact opposite of turtling and that is why you shouldn't push the offense when you have a 3 or 4 goal lead. I'm not saying they shouldn't play offense. But make the smart play.