GDT: We are playing the Blackhawks at hockey today

[geehaad]

Tripp ... said Reimer played a great game tonight totally forgetting the 3 stoppable ones he let in

I'm not going to criticize the doorstep redirection of the 3rd goal. Kane's spinner, however, was blocker-side at abdomen level, where he inexplicably pushed his blocker away from his body and allowed the puck to go 7-hole (Kane specifically called it "7-hole", so don't @ me). Imminently savable.

The second goal was the type of goal mentioned in Dryden's article: big goalie immediately drops into butterfly, puck goes over shoulder. Seems like goalies should never drop into butterfly when facing a wrister...that shot almost never stays on the ice, and yes, they could go 5-hole, but it's more likely that they are aiming above the pads.

I think Ned does better with the starter's mentality and Reimer does better with the backup's mentality, and since Reimer is going to allow 3 goals in every start, what's the difference in starting Ned 5 games out of every 8? We can make the playoffs with Reimer, but I'd rather have Ned as the starter in the playoffs (if Mrazek isn't available for whatever reason).

 

[MinJaBen]

The team just plays better in front of Reimer than in front of Ned. Why? I don't know. Is it confidence or some subtle difference in how each goalie plays? Whatever it is, even if it is not the goalies fault, it clearly shows. I wouldn't discount the team's performance when considering which goalie I would give the start.

 

[ClarkBolzano]

It's a condensed season, we're deep, and we're playing 10 games in 16 days. Pretty much no big deal.

He has almost no confidence right now.everybody Is scoring (which Is good) but He is not. They should Play him as much as possibile.put him again with Aho and Teuvo and make him feel important.

 

[MrazeksVengeance]

if Mrazek isn't available for whatever reason).

DON’T EVEN IMPLY THAT.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Just realized Pesce was the guy that got beat by both spinaramas by Huberdeau and Kane. Same spot on the ice. Bet he doesn’t want to see another one any time soon.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Just realized Pesce was the guy that got beat by both spinaramas by Huberdeau and Kane. Same spot on the ice. Bet he doesn’t want to see another one any time soon.

I mentioned it in the thread when it happened. I’m wondering if it’s a coincidence or if that’s something that Pesce is offering up when defending those far side rushes. Is he backing off and giving too much space? Playing it too safe? Maybe it’s nothing but would prefer our ‘rock solid shutdown guy’ not to be on the highlight reel in the defensive zone every night.

Now having said that, Reimer should have easily stopped the Kane goal and Skjei completely fell asleep covering his guy on the one before that so I’m not blaming Pesce for either goal but just wondering if this is a two time occurrence or a defensive vulnerability.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

That spinorama goal was nasty precisely because Reimer had no idea where it was going and had zero time to react to it. He guessed short side, which is usually a good guess, and when he moved to the near post he opened up. That was a combination of lucky and superdupernasty. On NHL Tonight they were basically saying "you know it's a good goal when the Canes win handily and it's still all we can talk about." Weeksy literally stood up on his desk and clapped.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

If it’s something he’s giving up - what you end up with is a guy facing the wrong way on his backhand. The fact that two guys were able to make two plays from that disadvantageous a position doesn’t mean it’s not the “right” thing to give up.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

You've got to give up something. When a guy elevates a backhand after a full spin and puts it high off the far post, sometimes you just gotta tip your cap.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

If it’s something he’s giving up - what you end up with is a guy facing the wrong way on his backhand. The fact that two guys were able to make two plays from that disadvantageous a position might not mean it’s not the “right” thing to give up.

But you know what, looking at both plays I see some commonality and can see why this might be a recurring issue...

Pesce being a RHD on his offside has his stick to the middle of the ice when on his forehand

Kane and Huberdeau being left hand shots also have their sticks to the middle of the ice when on their forehand

Turning their back to Pesce and going to the backhand allows them to do the following...

- Get the puck past Pesce’s body albeit to the outside and at a sharper angle

- It gets them away from Pesce’s forehand and gives an unobstructed lane to get the puck to the net

In Huberdeau’s case he was able to make the cross ice pass to Wennberg. In Kane’s case he still had enough angle to get a clean shot on net to the far side. Pesce’s only defence is to break it up weakly on his backhand with one hand on his stick.

Not saying this is a Pesce specific problem but perhaps giving the time and space there even though you are having the advancing player turn their back to the net maybe isn’t the best move.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

But you know what, looking at both plays I see some commonality and can see why this might be a recurring issue...

Pesce being a RHD on his offside has his stick to the middle of the ice when on his forehand

Kane and Huberdeau being left hand shots also have their sticks to the middle of the ice when on their forehand

Turning their back to Pesce and going to the backhand allows them to do the following...

- Get the puck past Pesce’s body albeit to the outside and at a sharper angle

- It gets them away from Pesce’s forehand and gives an unobstructed lane to get the puck to the net

In Huberdeau’s case he was able to make the cross ice pass to Wennberg. In Kane’s case he still had enough angle to get a clean shot on net to the far side. Pesce’s only defence is to break it up weakly on his backhand with one hand on his stick.

Not saying this is a Pesce specific problem but perhaps giving the time and space there even though you are having the advancing player turn their back to the net maybe isn’t the best move.

You're judging literally the best defensive defenseman in the game right now (1st in zone denials, 1st in board wins, 2nd in cross ice pass denials) against two of the best offensive players in the game.

When you step up on a guy that skilled, you make it easier for that guy to beat you. There's always an angle, and if every player has to pull a spinorama backhander to beat Pesce, I'll f***ing take it.

 

[Daeavorn]

You're judging literally the best defensive defenseman in the game right now (1st in zone denials, 1st in board wins, 2nd in cross ice pass denials) against two of the best offensive players in the game.

When you step up on a guy, you make it easier to beat you. There's always an angle, and if every player has to pull a spinorama backhander to beat Pesce, I'll f***ing take it.

Patrick Kane did the hockey equivalent of a 360 noscope AWP headshot. There is no way you can get angry at Reimer for that, and he clearly had no f***ing clue how to approach it, which I will give him a break on.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

You're judging literally the best defensive defenseman in the game right now (1st in zone denials, 1st in board wins, 2nd in cross ice pass denials) against two of the best offensive players in the game.

When you step up on a guy that skilled, you make it easier for that guy to beat you. There's always an angle, and if every player has to pull a spinorama backhander to beat Pesce, I'll f***ing take it.

Uhhh yeah, Pesce is great. Love him to death. Just would prefer to see less spinorama goals being scored on us with him defending. Is there anything in my breakdown you would disagree with?

I get that stepping up on the guy in that situation is a risk but we also saw that laying back and playing it safe had resulted in goals two games in a row. Maybe you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t but this is a discussion board isn’t it?

Also thanks for posting those fancy D zone stats. I forgot about them from when I watched that same twitter video as you from a couple hours ago

 

[Navin R Slavin]

Uhhh yeah, Pesce is great. Love him to death. Just would prefer to see less spinorama goals being scored on us with him defending. Is there anything in my breakdown you would disagree with?

I get that stepping up on the guy in that situation is a risk but we also saw that laying back and playing it safe had resulted in goals two games in a row. Maybe you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t but this is a discussion board isn’t it?

Also thanks for posting those fancy D zone stats. I forgot about them from when I watched that same twitter video as you from a couple hours ago

Lol. Be salty if you want. Play the percentages. Sometimes you get beat.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Lol. Be salty if you want. Play the percentages. Sometimes you get beat.

So you’ve got nothing that you actually disagree with in my breakdown then

 

[NotOpie]

BTW, the last goal of the game wasn't on Reimer. Not much he could do about Soderberg's tip. Jame played a very solid 3rd period.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

So you’ve got nothing that you actually disagree with in my breakdown then

Pesce’s main objective in that situation (Kane goal as I didn’t see the Huberdeau one) is to keep Kane To the outside and prevent him from cutting back to the middle where he could get a better scoring chance. Secondary goal is to try and prevent a pass from getting through, which against top players is probably less likely than a 50/50 proposition.

Given that those are his priorities, how do you propose he stops one of the most skilled guys in the NHL from doing a spinorama?

If I’m a coach and see Kane coming down against one of my defensemen, I’ll take a backhand shot from that angle any day of the week.

I think Reimer didn’t think Kane would shoot and it surprised him.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Pesce’s main objective in that situation (Kane goal as I didn’t see the Huberdeau one) is to keep Kane To the outside and prevent him from cutting back to the middle where he could get a better scoring chance. Secondary goal is to try and prevent a pass from getting through, which against top players is probably less likely than a 50/50 proposition.

Given that those are his priorities, how do you propose he stops one of the most skilled guys in the NHL from doing a spinorama?

If I’m a coach and see Kane coming down against one of my defensemen, I’ll take a backhand shot from that angle any day of the week.

I think Reimer didn’t think Kane would shoot and it surprised him.

I mean a backhand shot from Kane is definitely one of his most dangerous weapons and he’s no stranger to going the spinorama route and basically scoring goals like this in the past.

Maybe there is no solution. Kane’s good and he’s going to score his goals and get his points no matter who’s on the ice.

But to take your point about the D-mans priorities on that play. Maybe the fact that Kane going to the outside there makes Pesce think that he’s succeeded in his objective of keeping Kane at bay. Kane then says ‘Cool. Thanks for the breathing room. Now I can do my spinorama backhand thing which I like and catches people off guard’.

I don’t disagree with playing the percentages in general but when you become predictable in your approach great players will take that and attempt to do something against the grain and because they’re really freaking good they can pull it off.

The objective isn’t to keep Kane to the outside or stop a cross crease pass. It’s to stop him from scoring. You do that however you think you can. Kane just showed that if you play him the same way like you would against Jordan Martinook, then he’s going to do Patrick Kane things to you.

Look at the Slavin on McDavid highlight video. Is he playing the percentages and just trying to keep him to the outside and OK with giving him space? Those highlight goals that he and Malkin and MacKinnon score by carving through an entire team usually happens when you back off and give them to time and space to do something amazing.

Anyway, just putting out a different perspective here.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

I think highlight reel goals happen when you don’t give guys time and space and instead try to be aggressive and take the puck from them.

At the end of the day, in both cases Pesce forced the player to face the wrong direction on his backhand. As I said before, just because it ended poorly both times doesn’t mean it’s the wrong play. In one case a blind pass that should’ve been stopped, in another case a blind backhand shot that should’ve been saved. And, yes, in both cases fantastic plays by the forward.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I mean a backhand shot from Kane is definitely one of his most dangerous weapons and he’s no stranger to going the spinorama route and basically scoring goals like this in the past.

while I’m not sure there’s a way to measure it, I’d bet “backhand spinorama” is less than 5% of his career goals.

But to take your point about the D-mans priorities on that play. Maybe the fact that Kane going to the outside there makes Pesce think that he’s succeeded in his objective of keeping Kane at bay. Kane then says ‘Cool. Thanks for the breathing room. Now I can do my spinorama backhand thing which I like and catches people off guard’.

Maybe, but I’m more inclined to think that Pesce’s thinking that this is the most dangerous guy on the ice so I’m going to try to keep him to a lower percentage scoring chance. I’d be surprised if any NHl defenseman thinks they did their job against Patrick Kane while he has the puck in the ozone, but who knows.

I don’t disagree with playing the percentages in general but when you become predictable in your approach great players will take that and attempt to do something against the grain and because they’re really freaking good they can pull it off.

I’m fine if players think their best choice is a backhand spinorama against Pesce.

The objective isn’t to keep Kane to the outside or stop a cross crease pass. It’s to stop him from scoring.. You do that however you think you can. Kane just showed that if you play him the same way like you would against Jordan Martinook, then he’s going to do Patrick Kane things to you.

Look at the Slavin on McDavid highlight video. Is he playing the percentages and just trying to keep him to the outside and OK with giving him space? Those highlight goals that he and Malkin and MacKinnon score by carving through an entire team usually happens when you back off and give them to time and space to do something amazing.

Anyway, just putting out a different perspective here.

That’s fine. I just think he played the right percentage given the situation. Not concerned in the least about it.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

while I’m not sure there’s a way to measure it, I’d bet “backhand spinorama” is less than 5% of his career goals.

Maybe, but I’m more inclined to think that Pesce’s thinking that this is the most dangerous guy on the ice so I’m going to try to keep him to a lower percentage scoring chance. I’d be surprised if any NHl defenseman thinks they did their job against Patrick Kane while he has the puck in the ozone, but who knows.

I’m fine if players think their best choice is a backhand spinorama against Pesce.

That’s fine. I just think he played the right percentage given the situation. Not concerned in the least about it.

Yeah, I’m not saying Kane scores spinorama backhand goals all the time but just that he is capable of doing it and has a well documented history of him pulling it off. Obviously it’s a situational thing. Just like Svech with the lacrosse goal. Just because he’s only scored 2 goals like that which is 10% of his NHL total does that mean that when he’s behind the net with time and space other teams shouldn’t think about trying to defend that move because it’s not a guarantee that he’ll try it or score?

There’s a difference between ‘a player’ trying a move and a highly skilled guy trying it who is known to be capable of pulling it off.

It’s fine that you’re fine with how the sequence was handled. I’d prefer to figure out ways to prevent goals from being scored against, but maybe that’s just too ambitious.

 

[CanesFanBudMan]

A backhand sponorama from outside the dots is a lower percentage chance than alone in front for Kane or anyone. Peace’s job there is to keep him to the outside which he did

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

It’s fine that you’re fine with how the sequence was handled. I’d prefer to figure out ways to prevent goals from being scored against, but maybe that’s just too ambitious.

We all want to reduce goals against but our discussions here have zero Impact on that. I’m just analyzing a play as I see it. My view is that Of all the problems Carolina has in stopping goals against, this is way down on the list.

thus why I’m not too worried about it.

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

I'm just glad we can have this stupid argument after a win instead of a loss.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

A backhand sponorama from outside the dots is a lower percentage chance than alone in front for Kane or anyone. Peace’s job there is to keep him to the outside which he did

The shot was from inside the dot, but I get the point that is being made repeatedly.

I’m rewatching the video over and over again. Pesce actually got owned pretty hard. He weakly bends over for a stick check but the gap is too much and as Kane starts the spinorama he’s able to get around Pesce to the outside. Had Kane decided to not go for a backhand he could have cut in to the net and would have had Pesce beat who was off balance and trying to recover.