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

Status
Not open for further replies.

mad4comp

Registered User
Jan 21, 2010
6,246
2,852
Because Tampa didn't put any pressure on us in the first 2 periods. Once down by 4 goals they had to play more aggressive in the offensive zone. Forechecking aggressively and dmen pinching on every play. Tampa was forced to play desperate hockey.
Do you not watch many games? This happens in most games played.
BTW a goal on the pp and a goal because because we got too aggressive in the offensive zone isn't turtling. When you are turtling you don't give up 2 on 1s. Come on guys. Think. If we did turtle Tampa wouldn't have scored that 2nd goal. You guys want them to be more offensive minded in those situations. Well they were and it cost us a goal. This isn't a video game guys.

And you're not a coach, stop with the 'holier than thou' attitude. They turtled and they gave up 2 goals. Open your eyes and watch the actual game instead of just hearing the word turtle and coming to the defense of trotz like a knight in shining armor.

It was clear as day from the puck drop in the 3rd all they did was dump the puck in, change, and wait for their next shift to waltz in with the puck.
It was clear as day when DSP just saw the puck float by and instead of playing it, turtled to drop back and stand in front of Holtby.
It was clear as day when Orpik went to hit someone instead of grabbing the puck and starting a rush up the ice.

They turtled. Sorry if it makes Trotz look like trash, but it does. Trotz shouldn't be allowed in the locker room after the 2nd period if we have a lead. It's just the way it is. Tampa didn't play 'aggressive' hockey, they easily marched into the zone and set up shop for a good while (which is what got them the PP, and a goal) and then the rush back up the ice and goal by Palat.

And lastly, you're telling me, they waited until they were down 4 goals to play aggressively? Are you serious brah? This isn't a video game, they executed the NHL equivalent of the prevent defense and got burned. Even the TSN crew saw it and were befuddled as to why Trotz would call for such a strategy when we could have stepped on their throats for the entire period.
 

mad4comp

Registered User
Jan 21, 2010
6,246
2,852
Of course you want the puck out if your end. Sometimes its difficult to do that when your opponents are forechecking hard and defenseman are pinching to keep pucks in.

Wasnt that hard in the first and second period eh?
 

maacoshark

Registered User
Jul 22, 2017
9,629
3,723
We did, and that's not a bad thing at all. There was a difference in the way we trapped between the 2nd and the 3rd. In the 1st and second, guys were stacked up right behind the red line, whereas we stacked up the defense at our blue line in the 3rd. Also, we saved energy by turning the forecheck off in the 3rd.

I have nothing to complain about, that was perfect game management by Trotz.
Ya the trap was slightly different in the 3rd. They had to make adjustments for the onslaught they knew was coming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eazy for Kuzy

maacoshark

Registered User
Jul 22, 2017
9,629
3,723
Wasnt that hard in the first and second period eh?
You don't listen. And you don't get it. Do you think every shift of every period us going to exactly the same. Its a game within a game. Teams are constantly making adjustments. After struggling in the first 2 periods do you really think Tampa is going to continue what they are doing?
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,624
14,443
I didn’t see a turtle in the third period. I saw a poor PP, a couple of dumb penalties by Chiasson, and an unfortunate stumble by Kempny in the O zone leading to a transition goal against. The shot chart agrees that the turtle was not present:

upload_2018-5-13_11-10-19.png


They were still creating chances in the third period but didn’t have the same finishing touch they had in the first two periods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CapitalsCupFantasy

CapitalsCupReality

It’s Go Time!!
Feb 27, 2002
64,377
19,076
I didn’t see a turtle in the third period. I saw a poor PP, a couple of dumb penalties by Chiasson, and an unfortunate stumble by Kempny in the O zone leading to a transition goal against. The shot chart agrees that the turtle was not present:

View attachment 120871

They were still creating chances in the third period but didn’t have the same finishing touch they had in the first two periods.

Twabby defeating the casual fan’s analysis!
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,432
14,291
I didn’t see a turtle in the third period. I saw a poor PP, a couple of dumb penalties by Chiasson, and an unfortunate stumble by Kempny in the O zone leading to a transition goal against. The shot chart agrees that the turtle was not present:

View attachment 120871

They were still creating chances in the third period but didn’t have the same finishing touch they had in the first two periods.

First of all, single game corsi...

Second, maybe I'm reading that graph wrong but it looks like they were pretty flat in the 3rd, with their jump to their final level coming in last part of the 2nd, no?
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,624
14,443
First of all, single game corsi...

Second, maybe I'm reading that graph wrong but it looks like they were pretty flat in the 3rd, with their jump to their final level coming in last part of the 2nd, no?

Right now it’s a one game sample and maybe the turtle re-emerges as soon as tonight, but it just didn’t seem like TB got much of anything going except on their PP and the Palat goal in transition. Holtby was fine but I don’t really remember him having to do too much in the third period. They weren’t as good in the third as they were in the first two periods but they weren’t bleeding shot and quality chances against either. They could have done much better with their PP in the third period which honestly was the worst they played the entire game. They still seemed to be denying the defensive blue line effectively as well.

I’m not convinced it’s a trend yet but I just don’t see much to complain about in Game 1.
 

Bieronymus Trotz

Registered User
Sep 4, 2017
547
424
Hes in a red jersey, means top 6 likely
Wasn't Burakovsky in red as well the morning before he played on the third line? Regardless, they'd call Backstrom's line the second line anyway, and could just keep Vrana-Eller-Oshie together as the nominal third line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->