GDT: we suck again (canes vs kings)

[Vagrant]

Vagrant has finally revealed himself as Brock Steve McGinn's father.

I like the kid, it's true. But I don't think that makes the breakdown any less accurate. The whole sequence was sloppy, but I think what created that goal was Hainsey trying to make a veteran move and surprise Kopitar with pressure and the pass still got through him. If he makes that play, he gets a big pat on the back when he gets back to the bench. But if he doesn't.... well we saw that. It's still a gamble that you probably didn't have to take in a scoreless game. I think Faulk and McGinn both made the correct diagnosis to defend that rush but McGinn couldn't stay between his man and the net. Likely because he's a winger and what the hell else was supposed to happen.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Just look at it like this, if you see a forward covering a 2 on 2 then one of your defensemen got caught up the ice for whatever reason..

It's not exactly uncommon for forwards to cover when dmen pinch on the 'Canes. Specifically I've notice Teravainen and J. Staal doing it when Faulk decides to channel his inner Mike Green.

Regardless, I think you're overcomplicating it. There are 2 Kings players and 2 'Canes players. McGinn needs to pick one. He took too long to commit to Gaborik and didn't follow Doughty (which, IMO, would have been the correct decision). He failed to cover either player and it led to a 2-on-1 against.

If you want to argue that McGinn should never have been in that position, sure- but you're basically admitting that McGinn ****ed up. Nor do I think it's a particularly big deal (ignoring the 5 game skid and soul crushing loss). A 22 year old sophomore gets walked by Doughty and Garborik. Whatever.

 

[tarheelhockey]

BTW, McGinn didn't get "walked" by anybody. He stopped skating because he was lost in the play and didn't understand what was happening until it was too late. That could have been Hal Gill* instead of Gaborik, and Hal Gill* would have beaten McGinn to the net.

I see what Vagrant's saying, it's just a different interpretation of defensive assignments. The only person who knows with absolute certainty what the assignments were is Bill Peters. The common element in what we're all talking about here is that we had had a rookie winger playing high in the final 5 minutes of a 0-0 game while two of our best defensive forwards were lazily floating off the ice. That's a combination of tactical breakdown, and suffering the results of having inexperienced players up and down the lineup.

The one place where I vehemently disagree with Vagrant is the idea that McGinn shouldn't have been expected to play fundamentally sound defense on that play. It's NOT too much to expect him to pivot into a basic defensive stance, have his head on a swivel to see what's happening around him, and at least be a warm body moving backwards into his own zone. We're talking fundamental hockey skills here, and the only extenuating factor I can think of is that McGinn was so out of gas that his brain wasn't working properly.



* Not a prime Hal Gill. 41-year-old Hal Gill who hasn't played hockey in three years.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

We're talking fundamental hockey skills here, and the only extenuating factor I can think of is that McGinn was so out of gas that his brain wasn't working properly.

This is what fatigue does.

 

[tarheelhockey]

This is what fatigue does.

Perhaps he should have gone back to the bench

FWIW, McGinn had been on the ice for 1:02 when the puck went in the net.