Woke up early to see the game delayed without knowing the score.
After completing that and seeing this thread.... there's really a lot of on the one side and on the other side to be said. A bit like I feel about this team, and Sullivan.
Canes goal nr. 1 is a combo of Kapanen, Erod and Ruh not getting it done and then loose puck being available in the slot. Nothing Jarry can do. Somewhat fortuitous.
Canes goal nr. 2 is blind luck for Staal off a rebound. Seems to bounce off his own knee and trickles through Jarry. Complete coincidence.
Canes goal nr. 3 is Dumo giving away the puck straight up the middle and then failing to cover his man. Can't happen kind of goal that happens too often for our 1st pairing.
Canes goal nr. 4 is ZAR and Boyle being shown up for being too slow to play on the PK together, again. Good puck movement by the Canes, but likely doesn't happen if ZAR polishes off Teravainen on the wall like he should have.
Sure, Canes had other chances, some good ones too and Jarry especially robbed Teravainen once when 1st line (and 1st pairing) was caught running around, but for the majority, I did not think Canes played better or created better chances. They got the breaks needed more so than we did, and I refuse to see this as an indictment on our potential as such, as it was an even game and they're a very good team.
What seriously did not look good to me, again, was the PP where we had huge difficulties creating anything, and gave up too much even if this time we weren't scored on. Easily could have though, and it is telling that Canes had twice as many shots on goal while killing than we did on the PP. There is little new to say. When that unit is fully on, it makes everyone pay, but it has its obvious weaknesses. Letang was never a real QB. He works because of his athleticism and if he had the hockey brain to match he would have been an all time great. Malkin playing a quasi point position is always a risk at this stage of his career. Sid's passing is risky - and when we have difficulties setting up, neither Rust or Guentzel are very hard players to deal with when we dump it in, meaning teams that are able to press the first three hard while maintaining structure can see good results.
Our PK in the last two games have given up two goals on four kills. It's been the same combo of forwards and D-men. ZAR and Boyle, Dumo and Marino. While very different goals, lack of foot speed has been the central factor both times. I took a look at PK statistics after the game, and while ZAR had elite numbers earlier in the season, now with Boyle they are tanking and it's somewhat funny to see that unlike every other PK'ing forwards, ZAR hardly every register's shots while on the PK, which is indicative of us not having the puck and being passive when he is there. I'm not saying he is a bad PK'er, but he is not nearly as good at it as some think, and he absolutely requires someone else with speed to be with him.
Now.... Sully/the roster.
I understand those who feel aggrieved that by far our most dangerous line sees criticism. But apart from criticizing the times when they play bad defense/give up cheap goals (which is a theme), the criticism is not on the players, it is on Sully.
Opponents key in on that line, and we put so much of our quality on it, that it HAS to be a big positive factor. If it was actually dominating it would be something else, but reality is that they're just playing even with opposition 5 on 5 and only empty net production masks that.
But what about the middle 6 then - isn't the lack of scoring there a bigger problem? Yes it is, but when Kapanen is not turning into what we hoped, when Erod has returned to what he is, and when Blue and Zucker are injured, then there is just not enough quality to go around. Sullivan cannot be blamed for that as such, but he can be blamed (and should be) for trying out so little in the way of new solutions or spreading the wealth for a game or two at least to see how that'd work.
Then line 4.... role players who are not getting scored on, except for the PK. How can non-season ticket holders possibly gripe about those?!
Well, how can it be that a team that now is 4-3-3 in its last 10, failing to get 1 single ES win during its last 6 home games, beating only Philly.. in OT.. should consider its 4th line something that cannot be changed for a different look?
We are virtually a lock for a playoff spot. Why are we not trying out options to see if we have better fits?
You have someone like Zohorna who has been on the ice for 5 goals in favor and none against in his 8 games. Clearly, being on the second PP unit, Sully knows he has some skill also, and he played with reasonable success on the 3rd line before Heinen came back, giving us a guy with x-factor due to his size, something we have too little of.
We KNOW what we have in Simon for instance. I like Simon. I like that he can be plugged in anywhere in an emergency and do a good but limited job. But even if I ignore listed Pens X to not hear it on repeat ALL the time, it IS true that Simon should not be a regular or keep Sully from at least experimenting with fits.
We are not good enough to be more than a dark horse needing a lucky hot run in this configuration. That must be obvious. Even fully healthy, its hard to see it.
Why not at least try to find out if there are other configurations that might yield something better, make the team more than the sum of its parts, including making moves on L1?
That's the thing I have a real problem with regarding Sully, and I happen to think it has been a factor also in the playoffs.
When he came up, he brought some hungry youth in who played with passion and he preached balanced scoring/depth.
Maybe he wasn't creative. Perhaps he just brought some boys he was comfortable with from WBS and lucked into winning combo's due to injuries back in 16, a bit like Bylsma just lucked into a cup winning chemistry charm when Sykora HAD to be ditched in 2009 and Talbot became a Super Star. I hope its not just that, because for this team to be more than good and a playoff participant, we need a little of the magic back. And then we can be really good again, I think.