Five thoughts from U.S.-Russia…which was a good game

38 Comments

1. Jonathan Quick may not have a pulse. Here was his response when asked how he stayed “even” during such a wild shootout: “You go through shootouts during the regular season. You get put into situations like that a lot. You know what to expect.” Yep, just another shootout at the ol’ Bolshoy Ice Dome. Ho-hum. No different than a Tuesday night in Columbus. I guess there’s a reason he plays well under pressure. Anyway, Quick’s obviously the man for the United States going forward. Dan Bylsma called his performance “exceptional,” though the coach did leave the door open to giving Ryan Miller the start tomorrow versus Slovenia.

2. Yes, Zinetula Bilyaletdinov could really scratch Alexander Radulov. I don’t think it was an empty threat. The “among other things” was. Probably. But Russia plays the disaster that is Slovakia tomorrow. If it were an elimination game, maybe it would be different. But when a player takes two needless penalties that result in the only two goals the other team scores in regulation, on a stage like the Olympics, well, his coach is going to be upset. Maybe Bilyaletdinov will reconsider after sleeping on it, but then how would that look after what he said?

VIDEO: Watch OT and the shootout again

3. The crowd is a factor. “For sure, for sure. Definitely,” said Sergei Bobrovsky when asked if the home fans gave his team a lift. “I’m obviously focused on the game, but it’s easy to hear the crowd,” he said. “They were great. They support us very well, so thanks.” On the other side of the coin, here was Ryan McDonagh on the atmosphere: “We knew it was going to be loud with that crowd. We talked about controlling our emotions, and discipline. I think we did a good job of that, not falling into a run-and-gun style of game.” I’ve been in loud North American rinks during the playoffs, and what I heard tonight was just as loud, if not louder. When Russia scored, the sound was physically jarring. Pretty impressive given it’s a smaller rink than the ones in the NHL. Tonight’s attendance was 11,678. (Though I’m not sure that counted Putin. Does he need a ticket? I feel like he doesn’t.)

4. They may have lost, but the Russians were good. “I think our team played great tonight, but our result was not good,” is how Pavel Datsyuk put it. I admit I was skeptical that the Russians were good enough to win gold — I think a lot of people were (and some still will be) — but my opinion of them went up tonight. One thing Bilyaletdinov mentioned is that the power play needs to be better. It scored once tonight, but with all that talent out there, it maybe should’ve done better with the 8:18 it had to work with.

VIDEO: Al Michaels, Doc Emrick discuss game’s historical impact

5. I’m fine with how that game ended. Regular readers will know I care little for NHL shootouts, but it’s never been because shootouts, in and of themselves, aren’t entertaining. I just don’t think it’s a fair way to decide so many games. Tonight was something else. “I’ve never seen anything like that,” said Zach Parise. And neither have I. It was fantastic drama. Ultimately, tonight’s result isn’t going to cost anyone a medal. It may mean the Russians will have to play an extra game, but that may not be such a bad thing for them anyway. Worked for Canada in 2010.

Kings, Golden Knights labeled 2017 NHL Draft winners; Bruins, not so much

Getty
Leave a comment

It’s nearly certain that we won’t be able to determine the “winners and losers” of the 2017 NHL Draft until, say, 2022. If not later.

Still, what fun is that?

Quite a few outlets pegged some winners and losers, though sometimes the choices were more about themes like nations or player types than specific teams.

For example: Puck Daddy gives a thumbs down to the “green room” experiment.

Let’s take a look at some of the consensus picks.

Winners

Vegas Golden Knights

GM George McPhee was dealt a bad hand when it comes to the lottery draft, so he instead made his own luck. And then he selected three players who could improve this team going forward.

Sportsnet’s Jeff Marek especially liked the last two of their three first-rounders (Nick Suzuki and Erik Brannstrom), viewing Cody Glass as more of a no-brainer. Plenty of others were on board.

Los Angeles Kings

Gabe Vilardi fell to Los Angeles, whether it was because of shaky skating or some other reason. That potential steal (and some other shrewd moves) impressed the Hockey News’ Ryan Kennedy, who assembled draft profiles for PHT.

Again, Vilardi’s loss was considered the Kings’ gain, as slower skaters were considered losers by the likes of Post Media’s Michael Traikos.

Philadelphia Flyers

Boy, Ron Hextall is good at this thing, isn’t he? Philly drew high marks even beyond the layup of landing Nolan Patrick. The main area of disagreement revolved around the Brayden Schenn trade, though plenty came out on Hextall’s side there, too.

Arizona Coyotes

Boy, that negative press didn’t last long, did it? Between landing Niklas Hjalmarsson, Derek Stepan, and Antti Raanta in trades and savvy picks, they were a popular choice.

Themes

Smaller players, Sweden, and Finland drew semi-serious mentions as “winners.”

Losers

Boston Bruins

The perception is that they played it too safe.

Colorado Avalanche, for now?

OK, this was more about draft weekend than picks, but people are criticizing Joe Sakic for standing pat. That could change, but the negative sentiment is there.

Detroit Red Wings

Another common choice. Some believe that their draft was the worst of them all, which isn’t great considering the declining opinion of GM Ken Holland overall.

New York Rangers

Lias Andersson was viewed as a reach by plenty, and his connection to the trade to Arizona might intensify the scrutiny.

Themes

Not a great draft for Russian-born players and/or guys who don’t skate quite swiftly.

***

So, those are some of the near-consensus choices for winners and losers, via the brave souls who made rapid reactions to the 2017 NHL Draft.

Ducks ink D Holzer to two-year deal reportedly worth $1.8M

Getty
1 Comment

As the dust settled on the expansion draft, the Anaheim Ducks’ defense is coming into focus.

Sunday continued that pattern; the Ducks signed Korbinian Holzer to a two-year contract worth $1.8 million, according to TVA’s Renaud Lavoie.

You can break down the Ducks defense as more expensive players (Hampus Lindholm, Sami Vatanen, Cam Fowler, and Kevin Bieksa) and cheaper ones (Holzer, Brandon Montour, and Josh Manson).

Only Vatanen, Lindholm and Holzer see contracts that go beyond 2017-18 – at least without an extension yet for the likes of Fowler and Manson – so Holzer provides a little bit of certainty.

Is the $900K a minor overpay, though? Holzer played in 32 games for the Ducks this season after appearing in 29 in 2015-16. His impact has been pretty minimal, generating seven points while averaging 13:31 in ice time per contest (down from 14:45 the previous season).

Granted he may get more opportunities to show what he’s capable of if the Ducks lose another piece. Then again, at 29, the Ducks likely know what they have.

2017 Hockey Hall of Fame class to be named Monday; Selanne + who?

Getty
5 Comments

The 2017 Hockey Hall of Fame class is expected to be announced on Monday, and every indication is that Teemu Selanne will be on the list. Beyond that, well, there are a lot of question marks.

NHL.com notes that there’s at least a possibility that Selanne will be the only NHL name to be part of this class, which would mark a first since 2010 (when Dino Ciccarelli was the lone addition).

It’s a nice way to continue what’s been a buffet for hockey fans: the 2017 Stanley Cup Final’s conclusion, the expansion draft and then the 2017 NHL Draft. The HHOF announcements are a nice appetizer before free agency gets, well, frenzied?

“The Finnish Flash” was also an obvious top choice in last year’s poll to see who should be in the class.

Now, that doesn’t mean he is the only interesting name.

For one thing, Daniel Alfredsson will be eligible for the first time, much like Selanne. “Alf” falls in the “Maybe” category with some interesting, debatable other options: Mark Recchi, Dave Andreychuk, Alex Mogilny, Jeremy Roenick, Paul Kariya, Chris Osgood, and more.

The 2016 Hockey Hall of Fame class included Eric Lindros, Rogie Vachon, Sergei Makarov, and Pat Quinn.

Florida Panthers aren’t afraid to change, but will they actually improve?

Getty
3 Comments

Change is often a necessary thing in sports, and the results can be swift and brutal. There’s a fine line between rolling with the punches and blindly swinging, however.

The Florida Panthers’ history as a franchise makes you wonder if they’ll ever find the right balance between stability and innovation. Amid all these years of flip-flopping and regime tweaks, there may only be one unsettling constant: the on-ice product being middling-to-terrible.

Just look at the way they burn through coaches.

Six of their 14 head coaches were behind the bench for fewer than 82 games, including Tom Rowe, who was seemingly thrown out with the analytical approach last season.

Their GMs haven’t fared much better. Dale Tallon’s probably received the longest leash of them all, and this past year or so made a mess of that situation. And it’s arguable that things have only degraded as Tallon aims to clean up supposed “messes.”

The Panthers didn’t just lose cheap 30-goal scorer Jonathan Marchessault to Vegas; they also shipped Reilly Smith to the Golden Knights. Smith was a golden boy of sorts to the more stats-leaning members of the franchise, and while he struggled last season, it sure seemed like the Panthers were eager to get rid of him.

The same could be said about Jason Demers.

MORE: Welcome Demers to the trade rumor mill

As abrupt as the Gerard Gallant firing felt, the Panthers didn’t necessarily give the analytical approach much time. At least from an “optics” standpoint.

Now, parting ways with Marchessault, Smith, and possibly Demers may end up being reasonable in hindsight. Still, there’s no denying that Tallon made some mistakes in his stead; the “computer boys” didn’t sign an atrocious Dave Bolland contract and didn’t pick Erik Gudbranson over superior talent.

The bottom line is that the Panthers haven’t won a playoff series since John Vanbiesbrouck led them to the 1996 Stanley Cup Final. There’s legitimate concern that this franchise will keep making the same mistakes – and keep changing the cooks in the kitchen – while the results leave much to be desired.

Will Aleksander Barkov and Jonathan Huberdeau share the same frustrating path as Jay Bouwmeester and others before them?

This summer could serve as a serious fork in the road, as Tallon has some building blocks in place and an estimated $20 million in cap space. Even if the Panthers remain a budget team, they’re likely to have some room to work with.

Perhaps they’ll finally make the right changes?

Related

Panthers look to be aggressive in adding scoring