GDT: Capitals at Blackhawks Oct 1, 2013 8:00 PM ET

[MayonnaiseOreo]

NO ONE STOPS STAMOS WITH THE GAME ON THE LINE

Not with that hair and those eyes! Pure 90s goal-scorer right there.

 

[Wendy Clear]

I consider myself a bit of a Holtby homer, but the guy's annoyingly prone to these softies. Like someone else said, he made some beauties, but they're all for not when you let in a routine shot. I guess that's the difference between an elite tender like Lundqvist or Quick and a good one like Holtby; all can make the good saves but only the best have consistency.

Hope the guy picks it up. I have no confidence in Neuvirth and he's gonna have to bail out this defense a lot. That's not overreaction to one game, either - the D on paper isn't good. 3 through 6 it might be the worst in hockey, frankly. And the #1 guy still makes defensive mistakes over and over even if he is improved from 3 years ago.

 

[BobRouse]

A false choice, of course. I prefer fundamentally sound hockey most of all and this team rarely delivers that. Part of it's roster shortcomings in terms of balance but overall they still don't do the little things very well. I like polished mechnical teams from an execution standpoint and the Caps hardly find themselves near that level. The PP is the main area where they resemble a coherent team but that's not enough.

It's the first game...yadda yadda yadda...but I don't expect much improvement from the 4-6D or for them to suddenly become a much more poised team overall. Goaltending should straighten out and Laich ought to play center but that game was pretty reflective of what this team is for the most part. Competitive? Sure but not a powerhouse in terms of overall chemistry.

Every team has their warts even the Cup champs.

Fact is if Holtby didn't give up those two goals he probably should have stopped then we win.

We hemmed in Chicago in their zone for long stretches too. Does that mean Keith and Seabrook are a crappy pairing? Leddy, Oduya and Hjarmlmasssmamason aren't technically sound? Chicago has the best D corp in the league and we forchecked the heck out of them. Its too bad Crawford made some outstanding saves (and barely gave up rebounds).

Its one game like we all know. Against the best team in the league in their building. A game we probably should have and definitely could have won.

And it was exciting to watch as a fan of the sport!

I don't care for emotionless, trapping, chip and chase hockey. I don't get excited about shot blocking angles.

Thats me. I want to see my team win games and win them in exciting fashion. I want them to play an entertaining brand of hockey. Again thats just me.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Rids - Good point on Dale. I was one of the few that supported him. I originally thought his approach was to force Ovi to play defense, but agree, he saw young goalies a sketchy D leaning hard on kids, and figured it was easier to win 2-1 than 5-4. And probably knew our studly PP wouldn't get many chances in the playoffs.

It says something about George always patting himself on the back for his mobile defense. He had no idea that Dale would get so defensive.

Translated, he has no idea that he has assembled a backend that is not cup worthy. I guess Dale fishing for a job didn't have the heart to tell him his D/G was lacking. Would you tell your prospective boss, that he needs to rethink things, before he asks you if you want the job?

We have rolled young Gs and a largely a young D (Green Alzner Carlson etc) - are there any cup winners that did that? Sure we mix in a Theo and a Hammer, but our core pieces are young.

Not only young, but inexpensive. Too inexpensive, in the Caps world. Of all the "contenders", I would imagine that Caps spend far less on their 7 dmen, then anyone. Yes, they are young, but they have no vet leadership. Aside from Hamrlik, and partial seasons from Hannan etc, they never really have. And no, I don't really count Wideman as a vet leader, thought maybe that's unfair.

I see my posts are mostly going unanswered. I assume I have made points that ring true, everyone?

I try to be as fair as possible, but my utter impatience with George gets the best of me.

 

[Wendy Clear]

I'm guessing it's not gonna happen but--on the same train I've been on for a couple years--I think Mojo needs to get shifted down the lines. He does so little for that top line, and while I don't think he'll do much for any other, the 1st line has to be the bread-winner. If they want to keep Fehr at C for a long while to see how it goes, I'd straight-swap Mojo for Erat.

Erat on the 4th obviously has to change, and I'm sure it will. The trouble is, I reckon someone not named Mojo gets stung for it. That'd be wrong, IMO, although perhaps Laich can work his way back down on the 4th.

 

[swimmer77]

Why didn't Orlov play? Bad camp? Oates doesn't care for him?

He has all of the tools I like in a d-man - he's skilled, hits, has some wheels, good shot.

 

[BobRouse]

Rids - Good point on Dale. I was one of the few that supported him. I originally thought his approach was to force Ovi to play defense, but agree, he saw young goalies a sketchy D leaning hard on kids, and figured it was easier to win 2-1 than 5-4. And probably knew our studly PP wouldn't get many chances in the playoffs.

It says something about George always patting himself on the back for his mobile defense. He had no idea that Dale would get so defensive.

Translated, he has no idea that he has assembled a backend that is not cup worthy. I guess Dale fishing for a job didn't have the heart to tell him his D/G was lacking. Would you tell your prospective boss, that he needs to rethink things, before he asks you if you want the job?

We have rolled young Gs and a largely a young D (Green Alzner Carlson etc) - are there any cup winners that did that? Sure we mix in a Theo and a Hammer, but our core pieces are young.

Lets be real...Dale decided to take a Mustang and mud bog with it.

Bruce had an even crappier D and perhaps lesser goaltending and took the team just as far as Dale did.

Our team isn't perfect but we decided post lockout to build from within and at least have stuck to that plan. Being a young team (even younger this year with the loss of some veteran guys who were replaced with younger counterparts) means we have room to grow. Get better.

I've seen lesser teams make runs to the Cup. Its all about getting hot at the right time (team confidence) and excellent goaltending.

Our playoff struggles have pretty much always been due to the disparity in goaltending. Our goalies simply getting outplayed in large part. This has happened to the Caps pretty much from the mid 80s til now.

The one year where OUR goalie outplayed his counterparts? We made it to the cup finals.

 

[Langway]

I don't care for emotionless, trapping, chip and chase hockey. I don't get excited about shot blocking angles.

Thats me. I want to see my team win games and win them in exciting fashion. I want them to play an entertaining brand of hockey. Again thats just me.

Again, a false choice. Fundamentally sound hockey doesn't have to be trapping, droningly-slow hockey. Look at Detroit. HunterHockey was that way but, again, that wasn't fundamentally sound two-way hockey either. I don't find poor defense and sloppy breakouts to be exciting (in a good way) or entertaining. They're entertaining in a brawling, reckless sort of sense but that gets awful old after a while. I won't be sold on Oates until those areas are cleaned up to a much greater extent. Until then they're the same immature, questionably-constructed team as they've ever been.

Sure, they were territorial in some senses against Chicago but they still lost the ES shot battle 25-18. Chicago was more readily able to create prime chances, in part thanks to Washington's coverage issues.

 

[RandyHolt]

I wonder what Nick and Ovi think about MJ or bust as their LW. Screw what us fans think. Do they want Laich, or Erode err Erat, a board beast like Ward, or... do they love MJs speed?

Clearly the team is making a committment to developing MJs offense, and make him a wing, and that is their decision, but when you move a top prospect for a possible 1LW and you have him on 4, it does open the door to question the trade all over again.

One game, lets wait for injuries and failures and go from there. I was pissed Oates never adjusted lines in the playoffs, but all early indications are that he is shuffling the decks. Fehr at Center, Erat at C. Erat on 4. Carrick a 7 in practice, starting in Chicago.

 

[txpd]

We have rolled young Gs and a largely a young D (Green Alzner Carlson etc) - are there any cup winners that did that? Sure we mix in a Theo and a Hammer, but our core pieces are young.

Chicago...twice. Niemi and Crawford are very similar in age and games played to what varly and neuvy and holtby have. seabrooke and keith and hammer are marginally older than green Carlson and alzner

 

[BobRouse]

Again, a false choice. Fundamentally sound hockey doesn't have to be trapping, droningly-slow hockey. Look at Detroit. HunterHockey was that way but, again, that wasn't fundamentally sound two-way hockey either. I don't find poor defense and sloppy breakouts to be exciting (in a good way) or entertaining. They're entertaining in a brawling, reckless sort of sense but that gets awful old after a while. I won't be sold on Oates until those areas are cleaned up to a much greater extent. Until then they're the same immature, questionably-constructed team as they've ever been.

Sure, they were territorial in some senses against Chicago but they still lost the ES shot battle 25-18. Chicago was more readily able to create prime chances, in part thanks to Washington's coverage issues.

Did you think Chicago played a fundamentally sound game last night?

And what portion of our "not playing fundamentally sound" did you attribute to Chicago just being a damn good team?

They had their own coverage issues and we may have lost the shot battle but forced them into taking penalties to cover mistakes they made.

Ofcourse I'd like the team to play perfect hockey. But people sometimes fail to realize that there is another team on the other end trying to do the same thing.

Detroit sure did play sound altho not so much anymore. But it does help when you have one of the top 3 all time Dmen playing for you 30 minutes a night. They are not the same team without #5 and had terrible breakdowns last year.

 

[SimplySensational]

Chuck Gormley ‏@ChuckGormleyCSN 14s
#CapitalsTalk Brouwer, Green happy that Grabovski got 3 goals in debut but both want him to stay in position on power play.

wtf?

 

[Ridley Simon]

Lets be real...Dale decided to take a Mustang and mud bog with it.

Bruce had an even crappier D and perhaps lesser goaltending and took the team just as far as Dale did.

Our team isn't perfect but we decided post lockout to build from within and at least have stuck to that plan. Being a young team (even younger this year with the loss of some veteran guys who were replaced with younger counterparts) means we have room to grow. Get better.

I've seen lesser teams make runs to the Cup. Its all about getting hot at the right time (team confidence) and excellent goaltending.

Our playoff struggles have pretty much always been due to the disparity in goaltending. Our goalies simply getting outplayed in large part. This has happened to the Caps pretty much from the mid 80s til now.

The one year where OUR goalie outplayed his counterparts? We made it to the cup finals.

I call Horse **** to the last part. Varlamov clearly outplayed his counterparts in 2009' and we lost in the 2nd round. Bruce had how many cracks at the playoffs? 5? Dale had one. Dale, on average, was our most successful playoff coach ever, short of Wilson.

Don't bang on Dale. He saw the Forrest thru the trees with this team, and did what he could. You didn't like the style, as it wasn't "fun", but it almost made us winners.

Again, it shows what you stand for, and that's fine. But don't get your panties in a bunch when some of us stand for winning the cup, not just to be entertained (reminds me of Russell Crowe as Maximus...."Are you not entertained?!?!?)

PS-- and what team won the Cup with a magical run? Don't tell me LA, as they had a dynamic team that underachieved most of the year. And they had the best goalie going, in Quick. Their team was leagues better in D&G, which is why they won it all

 

[artilector]

This first game was entertaining to watch, but was not exactly inspiring as a Caps fan. So our PP is looking great and so did Grabo.. what else? Our defense looks thin and at ES only one line generated pressure consistently. And on top of that PK looks unimpressive and Holtby had a very shaky start to the season..

They'll win games, sure, but that first game sure gave lots of flashbacks to the flawed Caps teams of the past..

 

[Halpysback*]

some people just need to be wrong about everything I guess

 

[BobRouse]

I call Horse **** to the last part. Varlamov clearly outplayed his counterparts in 2009' and we lost in the 2nd round. Bruce had how many cracks at the playoffs? 5? Dale had one. Dale, on average, was our most successful playoff coach ever, short of Wilson.

Don't bang on Dale. He saw the Forrest thru the trees with this team, and did what he could. You didn't like the style, as it wasn't "fun", but it almost made us winners.

Again, it shows what you stand for, and that's fine. But don't get your panties in a bunch when some of us stand for winning the cup, not just to be entertained (reminds me of Russell Crowe as Maximus...."Are you not entertained?!?!?)

PS-- and what team won the Cup with a magical run? Don't tell me LA, as they had a dynamic team that underachieved most of the year. And they had the best goalie going, in Quick. Their team was leagues better in D&G, which is why they won it all

Maybe you are misremembering 2009...Lundqvuist nearly stole that series for them. Rangers were an extremely average team and we were superior. Varlamov played good but I wouldn't say he outplayed Lundqvuist.

In the first 3 games vs the Pens he clearly outplayed Fleury. That changed and Fleury played better and better as the series went on. Varlamov was bad in games 4 and 7. Real bad.

Quick was not that great until the playoffs started for LA. They came out of nowhere as the #8 seed and no one was picking them. Hindsight is 20/20 and thats why you seem to have perfect vision.

Montreal in 93 made a great run as did many teams that fell just short like the Caps, Ducks, Canucks (94 and early 80s), Panthers, Oilers, Canes (when they lost), North Stars twice.

I guess it depends how far you want to go back. There aren't as many cinderella's these days since teams are so much closer in talent due to salary cap

This first game was entertaining to watch, but was not exactly inspiring as a Caps fan. So our PP is looking great and so did Grabo.. what else? Our defense looks thin and at ES only one line generated pressure consistently. And on top of that PK looks unimpressive and Holtby had a very shaky start to the season..

They'll win games, sure, but that first game sure gave lots of flashbacks to the flawed Caps teams of the past..

I thought we had some territorial edge and while the 3rd line was responsible for alot the 1st line was zipping passes around and doing a bit of cycling themsleves. The 2nd line held its own and the 4th didn't play as much as I expected.

I thought it was a pretty even games. Hawks fans could say their PK looks unimpressive as well and that they got hemmed in their zone for long stretches.

Again..2 bad goals by Holtby. That was the difference and a small one it was. He is young and capable of playing better and I'm sure he will so no need to panic with him.

 

[artilector]

I wonder what Nick and Ovi think about MJ or bust as their LW. Screw what us fans think. Do they want Laich, or Erode err Erat, a board beast like Ward, or... do they love MJs speed?

Clearly the team is making a committment to developing MJs offense, and make him a wing, and that is their decision, but when you move a top prospect for a possible 1LW and you have him on 4, it does open the door to question the trade all over again.

One game, lets wait for injuries and failures and go from there. I was pissed Oates never adjusted lines in the playoffs, but all early indications are that he is shuffling the decks. Fehr at Center, Erat at C. Erat on 4. Carrick a 7 in practice, starting in Chicago.

I agree that different wingers should be tried, but to me the greater problem is still the Ovi+Nick combo. They've never been nearly as dominant at ES (especially in playoffs) as their collective 16m in salary requires. Simply put, these guys should not depend on the right winger for the line to click. In fact, I've basically given up hope that there's a winger that can make a big difference there. Unfortunately, I also barely have any hope left that they'll ever get split up again to explore other combos, lol.

 

[Halpysback*]

Chuck Gormley ‏@ChuckGormleyCSN 14s
#CapitalsTalk Brouwer, Green happy that Grabovski got 3 goals in debut but both want him to stay in position on power play.

wtf?

Grabo is the new Semin. Good player, extremely effective on the ice, Leader of Men will get jealous and talk **** about him and half the board will lap it up and want to run him out of town.

 

[Xaroc]

Maybe you are misremembering 2009...Lundqvuist nearly stole that series for them. Rangers were an extremely average team and we were superior. Varlamov played good but I wouldn't say he outplayed Lundqvuist.

In the first 3 games vs the Pens he clearly outplayed Fleury. That changed and Fleury played better and better as the series went on. Varlamov was bad in games 4 and 7. Real bad.

Quick was not that great until the playoffs started for LA. They came out of nowhere as the #8 seed and no one was picking them. Hindsight is 20/20 and thats why you seem to have perfect vision.

Montreal in 93 made a great run as did many teams that fell just short like the Caps, Ducks, Canucks (94 and early 80s), Panthers, Oilers, Canes (when they lost), North Stars twice.

LA was the BEST possession team from the Carter trade on. They were good before that but were unlucky shooting the puck (Quick was great that regular season as I recall). Most of the rest of those teams you mention including the 98 Caps came up short. To win it all you need to be good. You need to be probably a top 5-7 possession team. And you probably also need some luck.

So you have one example in the last 20 years of a team that got lucky and won it all (93 Montreal) and you want the Caps to base their cup chances on that model?

Edit: oh yeah Quick was awful that year

2011–12 Los Angeles Kings NHL 69 35 21 — 13 4099 133 10 1.95 .929

 

[RandyHolt]

Is Green playing for his next contract already?

Sounds like Grabs got in trouble for doing what our PP design guy should have designed in the first place. Green holding the puck up top, what is wrong with Grabs drifting to the crease for a moment. Distract or screen the G perhaps. Green is not passing it to him anyways. Nor is Brouwer, who seems sour that the Hawks collapsed down on him and took him out of the PP scoring fest.

Maybe Grabs adjusted to what they were doing himself, without having to wait for the PP to expire and have Oatsie draw up for him to go to the crease and screen if Brouwer is collapsed on. Thanks Grabs. Maybe our PP design ace had no idea Grabs had great deflections on his resume.

 

[BobRouse]

LA was the BEST possession team from the Carter trade on. They were good before that but were unlucky shooting the puck (Quick was great that regular season as I recall). Most of the rest of those teams you mention including the 98 Caps came up short. To win it all you need to be good. You need to be probably a top 5-7 possession team. And you probably also need some luck.

So you have one example in the last 20 years of a team that got lucky and won it all (93 Montreal) and you want the Caps to base their cup chances on that model?

Edit: oh yeah Quick was awful that year

2011–12 Los Angeles Kings NHL 69 35 21 — 13 4099 133 10 1.95 .929

The point is that no one picked LA. No one anywhere predicted them before the playoffs started.

BBs teams were dominant puck possession teams I thought? So did we get "unlucky" in the Montreal series?

Ovechkin had like a 2 or 3% shooting percentage in last playoffs and we had the puck possession stats vs the Rangers for the most part did we not? At worst it was fairly even.

It sure seemed with the Tampa series we heavily outshot them especially in the games here and outchanced them. I dont remember the stats but it felt like it. We lost because Roloson was just flat out better than Neuvirth that series.

Point is that a hot goalie is THE most important element that can ensure success in the playoffs. Team confidence is there too.

Is Green playing for his next contract already?

Sounds like Grabs got in trouble for doing what our PP design guy should have designed in the first place. Green holding the puck up top, what is wrong with Grabs drifting to the crease for a moment. Distract or screen the G perhaps. Green is not passing it to him anyways. Nor is Brouwer, who seems sour that the Hawks collapsed down on him and took him out of the PP scoring fest.

Maybe Grabs adjusted to what they were doing himself, without having to wait for the PP to expire and have Oatsie draw up for him to go to the crease and screen if Brouwer is collapsed on. Thanks Grabs. Maybe our PP design ace had no idea Grabs had great deflections on his resume.

I remember a practice for my club team in college. I was part of the "B" team and our squad was practicing with the "A" team (B team basically is everyone who wanted to play but wasn't good enough for the A team). Anyhow the coach of the A team was Canadian so you KNOW he was good and he really knew what he was talking about.

In one full ice breakout drill our best B team player skated thru everyone and scored this incredible goal that oohed and awed.

Can you guess what the coach thought of his exhibit? Yeah...he chewed him the hell out for being out of position and going against the plan.

If you let Grabo get away with that then you can pretty much let everyone get away with doing whatever they feel like at the time and before long that leads to dysfunction.

Everyone has to be on the same page. I think that is the point Green and Brouwer are trying to make.

 

[Hivemind]

I only recall Neuvy giving up two soft goals in the Tampa series. We lost because our defense had no answer for Tampa's aggressive forecheck (they didn't just use the 1-3-1 trap) or Tampa's transition game. Neuvirth was regularly hung out to dry by our defense in that series.

 

[BobRouse]

I only recall Neuvy giving up two soft goals in the Tampa series. We lost because our defense had no answer for Tampa's aggressive forecheck (they didn't just use the 1-3-1 trap) or Tampa's transition game. Neuvirth was regularly hung out to dry by our defense in that series.

You mean the chuck it in front of the net and hope it takes a bounce off a skate and in tactic?

I NEVER said we lost b/c Neuvirth gave up soft goals or played terrible (he didn't play great..average or something like that).

What I DID say is that Roloson outplayed Neuvirth and there is no denying that.

Maybe some of the Stat geeks can enlighten me here....
Starting from the Philly series and onward we have faultered in the playoffs. That can't really be denied.

Outside of the Pittsburgh and Boston series it sure felt like we had the possession stats and SOG advantage.

Certainly we had it against Montreal, Tampa, the Rangers (at least first couple times around) and even Philly from game 4 on.

If we are heavily outshooting them (or outshooting to some degree at least) and controlling the puck then how the heck did we lose those series??

You can say our D was bad or whatever..but fact remains we STILL controlled the puck and SOG. Were we unlucky?

To me I contend that all those series outside of Pitt perhaps...we got out goaltended.

Semin with 44 shots on Halak and 0 goals? Ovechkin with 30 or so shots last year and 1 goal?

Are SOG an indicator of team success? Are puck possession stats that important?

We beat boston despite getting whipped in SOG and puck possession (or at least it SURE FELT LIKE WE DID).

So...HOW did we beat Boston? I will tell you...Holtby outplayed TT. Simple as that.

 

[RandyHolt]

Agree Rouse. It's a team game. Calling him out to the media of all places, after a hat... seems like there is an I somewhere in that word Team. Shouldn't coaches try to fix it first?

If Green is just going to stand on the point and hold the puck, I think Grabs natural instincts kicked in. Move a little bit. Make a defender adjust. The goalie turn his head.

Maybe if Green made quicker decisions, he need not feel the need to help.

Based on his physical positioning, I am not sure how much he could have screwed up. He simply drifted to the slot when nothing was happening.

 

[BobRouse]

Agree Rouse. It's a team game. Calling him out to the media of all places, after a hat... seems like there is an I somewhere in that word Team. Shouldn't coaches try to fix it first?

If Green is just going to stand on the point and hold the puck, I think Grabs natural instincts kicked in. Move a little bit. Make a defender adjust. The goalie turn his head.

Maybe if Green made quicker decisions, he need not feel the need to help.

Based on his physical positioning, I am not sure how much he could have screwed up. He simply drifted to the slot when nothing was happening.

yep good point. Green and Brouwer should have kept their mouth shut and handled that internally. Oates should address that with those two as much as he should address Grabovski's apparent positional lapses.