GSN's Blame Game

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,114
30,330
Yip. I have Boro at fault for the first goal and Hoffman for the second.

So I watched the replay, Boro definately got beat by Sedin, but Turris lost his man, which resulted in Thompson releasing his man to cover for Turris. He (Thomspon) probably prevented a good chance by doing so, but the puck squirted by him and to his man that was wide open for the goal.

Long story short, Boro and Turris can split the blame on that first goal imo.
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
So I watched the replay, Boro definately got beat by Sedin, but Turris lost his man, which resulted in Thompson releasing his man to cover for Turris. He (Thomspon) probably prevented a good chance by doing so, but the puck squirted by him and to his man that was wide open for the goal.

Long story short, Boro and Turris can split the blame on that first goal imo.

Sounds good. I'll adjust.
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
Game #6:

GA 1: Can't blame anyone. It was a clusterf*** in front of the net on a PK.
GA 2: Karlsson lost his positioning and started chasing the puck. He's getting a blame point.
GA 3: Unlucky play, where we hit a post and out and they hit a post and in. No one was at fault.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,114
30,330
Game #6:

GA 1: Can't blame anyone. It was a cluster**** in front of the net on a PK.
GA 2: Karlsson lost his positioning and started chasing the puck. He's getting a blame point.
GA 3: Unlucky play, where we hit a post and out and they hit a post and in. No one was at fault.

You could probably put some blame on Oduya (I think it was him) for being too deep on the play and letting vanek get past him uncontested, but given it was late in the game, and the team was pushing for offense, I don't think it's a problem, just luck of the draw.
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
You could probably put some blame on Oduya (I think it was him) for being too deep on the play and letting vanek get past him uncontested, but given it was late in the game, and the team was pushing for offense, I don't think it's a problem, just luck of the draw.

Yeah, I thought about that and it was Oduya. The thing is, he didn't see the puck so it was really hard to blame him.
 

Sens of Anarchy

Registered User
Jul 9, 2013
64,989
49,506
On the 2nd goal I think Karlsson was on the puck carrier and stayed with him as he moved out top in the Ozone. We have seen our D do this over the past 2 years. I think someone is supposed to rotate back vs Karlsson letting him go and switching off. IMO its what they are being told to do.
 

Korpse

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 5, 2010
20,723
9,568
On the 2nd goal I think Karlsson was on the puck carrier and stayed with him as he moved out top in the Ozone. We have seen our D do this over the past 2 years. I think someone is supposed to rotate back vs Karlsson letting him go and switching off. IMO its what they are being told to do.

I thought Karlsson lost his positioning a little, he looked a little hesitant and didn't fully commit to Boeser. I think the biggest issue here was that Pageau and Oduya were covering Baertschi while Burmistrov was uncovered in front. For me, ideally Oduya sticks with Burmistrov.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sens of Anarchy

Sens of Anarchy

Registered User
Jul 9, 2013
64,989
49,506
I thought Karlsson lost his positioning a little, he looked a little hesitant and didn't fully commit to Boeser. I think the biggest issue here was that Pageau and Oduya were covering Baertschi while Burmistrov was uncovered in front. For me, ideally Oduya sticks with Burmistrov.

He could have been tighter on him for sure.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,114
30,330
I thought Karlsson lost his positioning a little, he looked a little hesitant and didn't fully commit to Boeser. I think the biggest issue here was that Pageau and Oduya were covering Baertschi while Burmistrov was uncovered in front. For me, ideally Oduya sticks with Burmistrov.

Oduya was between a rock and a hard place tbh. He had the choice to stick with what he was doing, or release one dangerous man to cover another dangerous man,
 

Korpse

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 5, 2010
20,723
9,568
Oduya was between a rock and a hard place tbh. He had the choice to stick with what he was doing, or release one dangerous man to cover another dangerous man,

It looked to me that Pageau had Baertschi, at least as Oduya gets draw towards him but I get what you are saying. There was a number of breakdowns here, and I think some of that has to do with the unfamiliarity between Karlsson and Oduya. The canucks cycled on that right side, and came out of the corner each time without any pressure.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
30,703
9,650
Montreal, Canada
Oct. 10

1st goal : all the players on the ice were to blame on that play. In the end it was a point screen shot that Andy should have played differently. Giving a full blame point to Borowiecki would throw the credibility of this thread out of the window... Sometimes 1 full point should not be awarded. I'd give 0.5 pts to Boro and that's it.

2nd goal : I don't see anybody to blame on that goal. Just a face-off win and a great shot from the point with ton of traffic. (blaming somebody for an icing is getting too extreme)

Oct. 14

1st goal : Boro missed his check then goes back way too far as Turris took his assignement, leaving a wide opened lane at the point, then he screens Condon who could have stopped it though. He was too deep in his nets and didn't have his glove ready. I'd say it's 75% Boro and 25% Condon. Not sure if you give 0.25 points.

Oct. 17

1st goal : 100% on Andy. It's a PP so the Canucks are going to put some pressure. There's a huge battle in front of the net between a few players but I have no idea why Anderson uses his paddle to give the puck back to the crease. That was a really bad reflex.

2nd goal : a redirection on a shot from the point. Hard to blame players on that, however I am giving 0.5 pts to Karlsson who left his position and left Burmistrov alone who had a much easier task for deflecting the puck.

3rd goal : pure bad luck goal. EK almost scores with a great shot off a nice rush but the puck goes very fast the other way, giving a breakaway opportunity to Vanek, who scores with a perfect slapshot. No blame on that goal (and a perfect summary of that shitty game)

Yip. I have Boro at fault for the first goal and Hoffman for the second.

Where was Hoffman at fault there?

Game #6:

GA 1: Can't blame anyone. It was a cluster**** in front of the net on a PK.

GA 1: Anderson gave the puck away right in the crease. Should have not used his stick.

Ok. So how about shared blame for Karlsson and Oduya. 0.5 each.

Disagree. Oduya was not responsible for the break in coverage. Pageau was more fault than Oduya here who was already taking the front of the net. Pageau turned the wrong side and basically left 2 men open on the left side.
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
Game 7 (NJD)

GA 1: Claesson loses puck, Brassard loses man. 0.5 each
GA 2: Anderson doesn't play the bounce off the backboards well. JGP loses man. 0.5 each
GA 3 and 4: Stone turnovers lead directly to goals. 2 for Stone.
GA 5: bad change but Andy should have had it. Anderson 1.
 

18Hossa

And Grace, Too
Oct 12, 2012
6,625
252
Game 7 (NJD)

GA 1: Claesson loses puck, Brassard loses man. 0.5 each
GA 2: Anderson doesn't play the bounce off the backboards well. JGP loses man. 0.5 each
GA 3 and 4: Stone turnovers lead directly to goals. 2 for Stone.
GA 5: bad change but Andy should have had it. Anderson 1.
The 3rd goal was a horribly unlucky bounce, not sure you can blame Stone on that one.
 

Dino Tkachuk

Ottawa Senators
Jan 6, 2009
1,382
262
The 3rd goal was a horribly unlucky bounce, not sure you can blame Stone on that one.
The barometet is: If that was Ceci would he have been given a point? I think the answer is yes so Stone gets a point too. :) A +2 for Stone on the night. He singlehandedly let New Jersey back into that game.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,114
30,330
Game 7 (NJD)

GA 1: Claesson loses puck, Brassard loses man. 0.5 each
GA 2: Anderson doesn't play the bounce off the backboards well. JGP loses man. 0.5 each
GA 3 and 4: Stone turnovers lead directly to goals. 2 for Stone.
GA 5: bad change but Andy should have had it. Anderson 1.

I might give one (or a portion there of) to Anderson on the wrap around goal, it seems to be his kryptonite. If he's in better position, maybe he makes the save.
 

18Hossa

And Grace, Too
Oct 12, 2012
6,625
252
I might give one (or a portion there of) to Anderson on the wrap around goal, it seems to be his kryptonite. If he's in better position, maybe he makes the save.
I’d agree on that too. Flopping onto your back hoping to make the save is not a good strategy
 

Alf Silfversson

Registered User
Jun 8, 2011
5,714
4,740
The 3rd goal was a horribly unlucky bounce, not sure you can blame Stone on that one.

He tried to make the fancy/lazy play. Why would you try a soft, backhand reverse through 3 players when you can take 2-3 strides and easily clear the zone. Stupid play by a player who usually makes the right play and knows better.
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
He tried to make the fancy/lazy play. Why would you try a soft, backhand reverse through 3 players when you can take 2-3 strides and easily clear the zone. Stupid play by a player who usually makes the right play and knows better.

Yeah, exactly. He tried to push the puck into a crowded area where a simpler play might have worked better.

I might give one (or a portion there of) to Anderson on the wrap around goal, it seems to be his kryptonite. If he's in better position, maybe he makes the save.

Yeah, possible but I find it was hard play for Anderson to follow.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->