GDT: 11/4/17 - 7:00PM EDT - Columbus vs Tampa Bay

[JoVel]

Fine - but look at last night. 12 scoring chances against over 65 minutes, including a 4 on 3 PP. That is an objectively good number. But for two VERY fluky goals, we all pat ourselves on the back over a "60 minute effort".

Last night was good. Jones' goal was pure luck and can't remember who scored the wraparound in the 3rd, but Vasy really should've had it, can't blame the defense at all for that.

And I have to agree with that you can't be dominating anyone for full 60 minutes in today's NHL. We took the foot off the gas for the 3rd period last night but it wasn't going into an absolute shell like we've gotten used to seeing. That has not been an issue this season at all.

 

[These Are The Days]

Macho pretty much dissected it perfectly. It's correct to say that Hedman f***ed up and cost us a goal because he tried to be cavalier in covering for Sustr but these are routine sequences that Sustr constantly creates. The smallest task turns into a disaster every time he's out on the ice. Don't ask him to play the puck up the boards because it'll get turned over. Don't ask him to defend one on one because they'll skate right by him. Don't ask him to go along the wall and win a battle because he's not physical enough. Don't ask him to stay in front of the net and defend because he's either going to screen the goaltender, get out muscled or needlessly wander off. And what ever you do don't ever... EVER ask him to shoot the puck. I have never seen such a poor shot by such a tall player.

The only thing Sustr does well is that he occasionally makes a good pinch in the offensive zone and even then it's dicey because all hell breaks loose when he does it at the wrong time

 

[Lord Stan 2020]

So let's talk about this goal.



So Sustr is the first on the puck, and... well does nothing with it. Johnson comes to help out but it's 3 on 2 (and one of those 2 is Sustr so effectively a 3 on 1).

Sustr loses the battle and now is behind the play. Werenski is going to the front of the net.

Hedman moves to take away the pass (look at where he is - shortest path to make a play is to the puck carrier - tougher to get to Werenski there than the puck carrier).

Now - the pros for moving to Werenski is that he has more time to react to a pass to break it up. Downside is the puck carrier is going to have a lot of time and space to make a play. It's a higher risk play by Hedman, but it's defensible.

Sustr? First he mishandles the puck against the forecheck (shocker). Then he loses a battle on the boards (shocker). Then he finds himself behind the play (my god that has never happened before in his career).

Hedman was in a position where he had to cover from a soft soft soft play, and tried to do it in a way that would lead to no scoring chance rather than trading a high chance for a mid chance, and the pass just beat him. Eh - that happens but if it works we say "WHAT A PLAY BY HEDMAN!" There is no scenario where we look at Sustr's play and find a way to defend it.

sorry all got was commercials