The Hockey PDOcast - Game 1 Results, and Game 2 Adjustments

Episode Date: May 4, 2023

Jack Han joins Dimitri to discuss what we saw from the first game of every series in round 2, and adjustments the teams that lost Game 1 can make moving forward.This podcast is produced by Dominic Sramaty. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate. If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

since 2015. It's the Hockey PDOCast with your host, Dmitri Philipovic. Welcome to the Hockey PDOCast. My name is Dmitra Filipovich. And joining me is my good buddy Jack Hahn. Jack, what's going on, man? We're in playoff mode here. My son, Willie, he's two weeks old, and we're getting up three times a night. So we're in one here. But on the plus side, I've been watching a lot of West Coast hockey because I'm up. Well, there you go. Congrats. Since the last time. we had you on for a round-room preview. You've become a dad to one son. You've also sunned a bunch of people who came after you

thinking that you were just hot taking your pick for Bruins, Panthers, or at least your analysis of it. And those were 20 minutes of PDO-cast, Hall of Fame analysis there. So go back and listen to that, but that was a fun one. This isn't a victory lap, though, because we're going to focus on round two and all the games are saying, Do you want to start with Leaves Panthers?

Because we're going to touch on all the series seen so far. We've seen game one from all four of these. There's a lot of fun stuff to get into. I think the funnest part of this discussion for me is kind of looking at it from a perspective of adjustments because every team that I picked to win round two has lost game one. Now, I'm not worried about that because as we saw in the first round, I believe the Cracken were like the only team that actually won game one and went on to win their series. It was very bizarre that way in terms of adjustments being made in game one,

not necessarily being indicative of how the entire series is going to play out. So there's a lot of runway here. But I'm going to try to view this from the perspective of, all right, the team that I thought was going to win is still going to have a chance to turn things around here. And game one was not necessarily representative of how good these two teams are. Yeah. I mean, if we start with Toronto, Florida, well, as we saw, Florida is a good team, right?

They got good players. their regular season record was not that great, but there were a lot of underlying signs that that team was going to be better than they were. Like, obviously they're not perfect, but, you know, they, they completed the upset, and now they've sent a message to the Leafs that

they're not a flash in the pan that they've actually got quite a bit of quality for them to contend with. Well, game one was a perfect game for me in terms of just watching it, because you come away from it, in the panthers win, right? but you come away from it with the sense that I think both teams have to, when they watch the tape,

feel pretty good about how that game went from their own perspective. I'm sure there's things that, you know, the Leafs would like to tidy up in their own zone or little mistakes they made. And similarly with the Panthers, but you come away from it, and both teams kind of got everything they wanted offensively, in my opinion, and in pretty high volume too. And in particular, for the Leafs, despite losing that game, I just feel like watching it optically or aesthetically,

it looked so significantly different than pretty much any game in round one against Tampa Bay, aside from those third period comebacks they'd make where the ice would open up for them a little bit, there'd be much more opportunity for them to carry the puck into the zone and create off of the rush. And that's exactly what game one against Florida looked like. Now they weren't able to capitalize on a lot of those opportunities, but you have to feel like with the shooting talent they have, if they get those looks for the next five to six games, there's going to be many more goals than not.

So the one thing that I think we've got to be careful about from Toronto's point of view is the phenomenon called the happy camper. So obviously they've come out of the first round for the first time since forever. They're playing against the team. It's essentially a dream matchup because by the numbers in terms of the regular season, Florida is the worst team in the playoffs instead of playing Boston, and the best team in playoffs. But this is where the danger sets in

because if I'm Toronto, I wouldn't be happy at all about game one because we're not here to trade chances. We're not here to, you know, lose a tightly fought battle. We're here to completely neutralize Florida and take away their will to fight their role to play. So for me...

I don't think they're going to do that, though. But that's got to be the plan. Okay, like the one thing that really jumped out, to me when I looked at game one, whether it's on video or on the stats, is Florida got a ton of net front looks. They scored two goals, not including the Verhegei breakaway, but they scored, you know, two goals off off of ozone play in the blue paint or thereabouts. That can't happen. It just cannot happen. Yeah, no, I know you mean. And this Leafs team has certainly, you know, placed an added emphasis on getting much better there in front of their own net, right? And, and sort of

priding themselves on that. And that's why at the start of that lightning series, when game one kind of went haywire and they beat them in that way, I think Shelton Keith was very public about like, this isn't the type of team we are. This isn't the way we play in the regular season. And we need to be better. And they were better as that series went along on that front.

But I don't know. Like I think ultimately this Panthers team is still a lot of what they did in game one is what they did to the Bruins in round one. And maybe you're right from that perspective. If you're the leaves, it's like, well, and they won that series. So we don't necessarily want to repeat that mistake. but they're going to get their rebounds. Like they led the league in rebound goals this season.

They're going to get their chances off that forecheck. They're going to do that. I think from the Leafs perspective, though, you do, like it, it's not a moral victory. It's a loss. But ultimately, if you go back and watch that tape, like the number of chances that their top players got has to be encouraging Jack. Like, those guys are going to score more than twice if they repeat all of those looks a hundred times.

A lot of times they're going to score many more goals than that and they're going to win those games. And so that's what I mean from feeling good about it. There's certain things defensively they can do better certainly, but offensively, like, they got the looks that I think they wanted. Yeah. I mean, I've been happy with their top players. I think, you know, they've created goals. They put up points. They've driven play at five on five.

It's more the depth of the team. Like if you go on natural statric and you look at the shot share that the bottom. bottom six has, like there are some pretty shocking numbers. Like you'll see numbers like whether it's shot share or expected goal share. Like when the number starts with the three, like you're asking yourself some serious questions and the Leafs have a handful of them both at Ford and on defense, you know, who's expected goal share starts with three. Like for a playoff team that's in the second round, like obviously you're happy to be there,

but that's going to be a concerning point. And I know you wanted to talk about coaching adjustments. And one of my rules of thumb is, um, You know, like I have a commerce background and one of the courses, one of my favorite courses in undergrad was a course on negotiation that was taught by a Colombian negotiator who actually negotiated with the drug cartels and did a lot of things at the international level. And basically the one of the things that course taught me that I still use today is you always have to have a bat an batina. Batna is best alternative to negotiated agreement, which basically is what's your baseline? Like at which point are you willing to walk away or in hockey terms, you know, what's the minimum level of performance that you were able to accept from a certain player? You know, I'm thinking about, again, a number of their depth forwards and a couple of their defensemen.

When you're expected goal share starts with the three, you got to think, okay, like, is this guy better off on the ice or in the press box? And that's the conversation that, you know, you don't have to have to have with the player necessarily. but at least you have to start having amongst yourselves as coaches because it's very tempting to just stay with quote unquote whatever worked. But, you know, the series is long, but it's also short if things don't go well. Well, it is. But isn't this, doesn't that kind of comes to the territory a little bit for a lot of those players, particularly in the bottom six and the fourth line specifically, right? Now, Sam Lafferty got pulled out of the lineup for Michael Bunding and we saw that that was, yes, the right move despite the fact that they had been winning previously. like open thing is a significantly better and more impactful player.

But for a lot of those guys, it's like when your entire value or quality is derived from nothing really happening when you're on ice, if it's just purely sort of like defensive suppression value and you're not adding anything offensively, you're going to get into these spots sometimes where those numbers look quite poor because you're not really, even if you're giving up some stuff on your end, if you can create on the other way, at least the balances it out a little bit,

whereas in this case, like guys like David Camp and Zach Astor Reese, Like they're just their absolute zeros offensively for the most part. And if that's the case and you're giving something up, then then that's how you get those numbers that you're referencing. So they play tonight, correct? So the one thing I would look for is the number of times when the Leafs, they'll go for a stretch pass, but it'll essentially become a neutral zone turnover.

And then the Panthers re-enter. And then that might happen once or twice. And then the Leafs get really passive. And then they collapse the slot. And then the Panthers are still able to get up. whack on the puck because they're coming in with speed, you know, through that middle of the ice and landing on the net against flat-footed defenders. So if the Leafs are able to avoid having too much of that, they're going to be fine in this series. But if Game 1 is an indication,

like, that's an area that the Panthers can really hurt the Leafs. And it could be the only area that they could really hurt the Leafs. Yeah. Yeah, I noted that because we did a big show on forechecking yesterday with Jesse Marshall. We were talking about how in games. Game one, it felt like they made some mistakes early on on the breakouts. And then they got really not necessarily like tentative, but very slow in terms of like passing it back and sort of playing with their food and trying to wait for the perfect pass. And then that just played right into what Florida wanted from them.

And so I think they need to like attack more quickly and decisively in that way. But still, I mean, in game one, I had scoring chances 20 to 15 for the Leafs and most of that was off the rush. Now Florida got theirs off the forecheck and off of like point shots that led the rebounds. And so that's what I mean where both teams, it was a perfect game offensively because that's exactly how I think they ideally will create in this series. I still think Matthews had 11 attempts, six shots on goal, four scoring chances, set three others up. Nealander had had his as well. And in Neelander's case specifically, it felt like watching that game.

And this is going to kind of maybe segue us a little bit to talking about other series. The theme of Brown 2 for me is teams who need to adjust to playing significant. different opponents stylistically, right? And I think in round one, the Leafs got so used to, because of the just like, immense pressure that Tampa Bay was forcing on them in the neutral zone and then towards the offensive zone,

there were so few times where they could just kind of skate freely into the zone and attack. And there were a number of times it looked like to me where the Leafs would just walk into the zone and there would be space and they were almost expecting someone to be there. And so instead of just like taking the puck to the net and attacking, they were almost like putting up. up a defense in front of themselves that wasn't actually there, that they were just anticipating

to be there because of the games they just played in round one. And so I think that that will be a bit of an adjustment. I think if you go back and you watch that tape, if you're them, you have to feel like, all right, there's probably more, even more that we can do with these opportunities because you and I love what Florida's doing from like an aggression perspective and how they're attacking up ice. But unfortunately, sometimes if the puck gets past you, if it balance is weird. If there's a missed assignment, that does lead to opportunities the other way, right? It's like defensemen get out of position. You're asking guys like Mark Stahl and Radical Guta and Aaron Neckblad to all of a sudden cover significant ground, which they're not necessarily

suited to from a skating perspective. And so it feels like there should be ways to once you get past that forecheck, which is easier said than done, of course, but once you get past it, you have an opportunity to actually do something productive. Yeah, I think we've covered it for series. I think that the battleground is fairly well defined and the things that both teams need to do. I think it's fairly clear. Okay, here's one more interesting point because this came up at the end of game one. Paul Maurice and it became a bit of a joke like, ha ha, he's flashing the five to one to the referees in terms of how many penalties there were. Obviously, some gamesmanship involved and unfortunately, we know how NHL officials work. Like you go back and you're

like, huh, it was five to one for, at least favor. And then all of a sudden in game two, you come out and you try to balance it out a little bit, right? There's a little bit of game management. You're trying to make sure everyone gets their fair share. And all of a sudden, you lead to some strange calls or some strange no calls. So that's certainly within the realm of possibilities. But watching the way Florida played in game one, watching the way they played in round one against Boston, watching the way they play in the regular season, I don't think that five to one is necessarily a massive aberration.

The least might take more penalties themselves, certainly. But when you're like just dashing into the zone and just watch, loudly launching your body the way San Bennett did on his penalty, and you're doing that time and time again, there's going to be opportunities for the Leafs Power Play to score as well. And they didn't capitalize in game one, but rewatching that, they got so many chances, especially in the first period off of the two power plays. And so we mentioned that as like a potential scary thing for Florida in round one against Boston.

And I think they overcame it, but they gave up 11 power play goals or something. And so you're really playing with fires. That's not necessarily in you analysis because I'm sure they know that. and then you kind of take it with the territory. But it does have to be a little bit concerning considering how their penalty kills looked, how Toronto's power plays looked, and the fact that they just keep taking this many penalties. Yeah.

So the only thing I'll add on that is Toronto's power play and Boston's power play are quite different. I think Boston's, it's more static, it's more structure. Toronto's a little bit more free flowing. And the thing I would maybe work into the power play a little bit is getting the puck down to the goal. line because again the Panthers play a diamond and they're vulnerable on quick high to low movement because they can't collapse back the net quick enough. So it could be, you know, Margar from the flank down to O'Reilly and then back up to

Tavares right in front of the net. It could be a play like that. But that's a play that Toronto can use and to really exploit Florida. Do you have any plays that you would be trying to incorporate on the breakout that would help you navigate this a little bit more and maybe avoid some of the state mistakes, Austin made in terms of like turning the puck over in their own zone, which led to glorious Panthers opportunities. Like beyond, I guess, maybe like BX on the broadcast was saying that he would just go with

a high flip and try to turn it into some, you know, foot races and 50, 50 pucks and try to attack that way as opposed to trying to string together passes because clearly that has not been working for teams that have been playing against the Panthers. Well, like Toronto used the high flip quite a bit now. Like I watch how they play and it's, it looks a lot like how they played back in 2017, one I first started there. So it's not a question of always high flip or never high flip. It's more of a mix.

You know, is it 80-20? Is it 60-40? Is it 40-60? We'll see. But certainly, I think, against this Panthers team,

they're super aggressive. So you can't always show them the same thing. Because if they do, then they're going to catch off to that. Yeah, they can either hurt you by forcing turnover at the goal line, or they can hurt you by, you know,

taking your high flip in the same thing. neutral zone and then turning it back against you as a rush. So again, it's, you know, it's not always or never. It's game theory. And it's also just having your defense can be a little bit more poised with the puck, getting off the wall, you know, shoulder checking early so that they know what to expect. Because I think against half the Toronto's defensemen, they probably defaulted to the, the rim or the high flip a little bit too often.

But, but it's just, you know, I think game one, it's, it's bad because they lost, but it's good because I think it's a very useful wake-up call. I think they got some information on some of the areas they got to do better. So going forward, I think, I mean, we'll see what happens tonight, but I think they're in good shape if they make those adjustments. Well, I would not recommend rimming it. The Panthers have been, their defensemen have been sitting on that quite well and closing off the walls and then knocking those bucks down.

I thought an area they had a bit of success in game one was when they'd have like a center a comeback real low and provide support by like driving the middle lane and getting it out that way. And there's a few instances where either like a Kerfoot or Tavares was able to create a nice exit and then immediate entry off of it by doing that. And in round one, you and I were talking like I think part of the difficulty for why Boston wasn't able to adjust or maybe implement some of that stuff was, well, they didn't, their top two centers were basically hurt in that series, right? And not that they would have Patrice Bergeron doing heavy lifting, carrying the puck out of

the zone himself, but it just provides you with fewer options when all of a sudden you're leaning on guys who are having to do more than they probably did at any point during the regular season. Yeah, I mean, if the Leafs can find the middle of the ice early on the breakout, the Panthers are going to have a real tough time defending that because that's not how they're built and that's not how the personnel really likes to defend. So, you know, there's a high flip, but if you can find the middle early, you know, using both kind of alternating or finding the right mix is going to.

be really important. Okay, well, let's stick with the East. Let's move on to Hurricanes Devils because I mentioned this one how it was stylistically a much different matchup for what they were facing for the Leafs going from Tampa Bay to Florida. I think for the Devils, what, there was like a 45-hour window where they played game seven at home against the Rangers and then they go into game one against the hurricanes at whatever rank.

They're called PNC or whatever. And I can't think of two teams that are more polar opposites. in that way in terms of how they play, just watching the speed and the, and the aggression defending from the Rangers throughout that series versus what they stepped into against Carolina. I think they got their sea legs a bit under them as that game went along. I mean, they had to because period one, they had one shot on goal in the first 20 minutes and it was from the neutral zone.

So it only could get better. But I thought they started to kind of play in their game more, getting some more chances, attacking off the rush a little bit more as that game went along. Not enough. but that would be encouraging that there is adjustments to be made there and that the series will look different than the start of that game because that was about as dominant defensive performance as you've seen. And I said that after what the devils did to the Rangers

and now the hurricanes flip the script on them and just annihilated them in game one. So the thing that it's so difficult in the NHL hockey is practicing the way that you play just because there are many games. And then now we're into the playoffs. People are banged up. people are tired.

So when you have that turn, that kind of turnaround between game seven against the Rangers and game one against Carolina, I don't think the devils either they practiced or it would have been just a really light skate to kind of get the, get the legs moving. You're in no way physically preparing to play against the Carolina hurricanes.

Like I saw, you know, I saw the game last night and it's just, there's nothing you can do because as soon as the devil's player touched the puck, there was a hurricane like sitting. right on top of them. Like what are you going to do? Right. And the problem is

that the way that the basically the league is set up, you can't practice that in practice because otherwise you're wearing yourself out for the game. So basically like exactly as you said like the devils look better in the second half the game but then

by that time it was just completely out of reach. Yeah. Yeah. But I don't know. I mean, it's just I can imagine it was shocking to me watching it because you get used to seeing a certain thing and the doubles had such a speed advantage in particular against New York,

and that's kind of why they were able to smother them and turn that series around defensively. And then it'll be a lot different against Carolina, specifically as well on the other side of the ice where the Rangers were sort of, they got into trouble by overpassing and trying to be to east-west in those games against New Jersey speed.

And that's something Carolina never really does, right? just plow straight ahead, get rid of the puck, chase after it. And so I'm curious for your take on whether you would consider finally putting Luke Hughes into a series like this, acknowledging that he's got the talent certainly to help against Carolina's four check. But it's a pretty tricky spot to throw someone into against kind of like this buzzsaw that especially forchicks as heavily as Carolina does. It's not necessarily, I think, is cut as dried as you suspect on the surface.

So certainly Luke Hughes has a lot of qualities that I think can help, especially on the breakout. But I don't think the devils are kind of forced to put him in yet. I think there's a lot of things that they can do to gain a foothold and sort of start imposing their will. And the thing is, so they scored one goal last game. And it's a perfect microcosm of how you play against the Carolina hurricane. So there was a bit of a broken play in neutral zone. The puck goes up to the offensive blue line to 44. I think that's Miles Wood.

Miles Wood takes a hit and he just bumps the puck like 10 feet to Bastion who goes in his. I think it was some of the McLeod and McLeod pass in the passion. But yeah. Yeah. So the thing with Carolina is they're so aggressive and they're so physical. But once they actually lay their hands on you, they're really vulnerable because they can't defend you any better at that point. But then if you're able to kind of just slide that puck out into space, all of a sudden you have a teammate who can skate. on to it. So the, and again, it's a really hard thing to practice. And I think that's why teams have

so much trouble against Carolina. But like, I play a lot of NHL 23. And most good players online, they defend exactly like the Carolina hurricanes. Like they forecheck the crap out of you. As soon as they turn the puck over, they'll just hit the speed boost right up the middle of the ice. And then if you use any sort of a delay, like they're back in your face. But the thing with with them is if you let them hit you and you somehow are able to survive that initial contact, now the play opens up because now, you know, they've committed to the hit. They've committed to whatever defensive play. And then you can pass the puck to the next guy and sort of cut through the defense.

So again, really difficult to practice in real life because, you know, you have that physical fear element, but also, you know, like it's real life's way more messy than a video game, right? but by absorbing and inviting that contact and then making the next play, that's how you can beat Carolina. And the other way to beat them is they play man on man basically all over the ice. Their forecheck is really aggressive because they lock on to you individually. Their D zone is obviously man to man. For players like, you know, Jack Hughes or, you know, Thomas Tatar or Yesper,

about like one important concept that can help them is, uh, is called changing checks. So what that means is let's say you're Jack Hughes and, you know, Jacob Slavin is defending you one on one. The idea is you're not trying to beat Jacob Slavin. You're not trying to go through him because that's too low percentage.

So what you want to do is you actually want to carry the puck toward his partner who's Brent Burns. So now you're forcing them into making a decision, you know, is there a switch? Does Burns come and cover you now? because you're in his area or does the slave and follow you across

in which case Burns has to go the other way. So that can cause a lot of confusion and against the pure man on man, you know, you can walk your opponent right into a pick or maybe right into a teammate or right into a net or at least pull them into an area that's uncomfortable for them.

And I think the devils are good enough to play that way. And once they got, they have a little bit more, confidence, a little bit more poised with the puck, like that's what I'll expect them to do both off the rush and end zone. Yeah. Yeah, I would suspect they certainly have the personnel to be able to attack that way. And you're right.

Even if they did have practiced time, I imagine that you sort of need to like feel the way the hurricanes play against you to get your bearings as opposed to you can't really stimulate that, right? I also imagine that a guy with Timelmeyer's skill set would help quite a bit in this particular series and he wasn't available in game one. We'll see if he'll come back after that big hit from Truba. But I imagine he would help quite a bit. I still think that as bleak as that game looked particularly in the early going,

where it was just that he was completely tilted and lopsided. I still like New Jersey's ability to keep up here and create much more and show better for themselves and they did game one. So I'm certainly, I feel that way about every series, but I'm certainly not pressing the panic button despite how bad game one looked. Do you have any other thoughts on on this particular series? I mean, we've only seen the one game of it, of course, but it was kind of an interesting one just because it did look so different

than round one for them. Yeah, I think New Jersey is going to make a series of this. And, you know, if I look on my Twitter timeline, especially, you know, Corey Snyder, he's a big Keynes fan. Like the thing that makes him really nervous is that, you know, the hurricanes, they can't really score without Svetnikov and Terravine And so they may still get 60% of shots, but they're going to have trouble finishing.

And that's where the devils can be, you know, if they're, if they're clinical, then they can really make a series out of this. Yeah. They did get some good looks in game one, especially like I thought, Ah,

Jarvis and Hs were playing very well. But yeah, I'm with that. Okay, Jack, let's take a break here. And then when we come back, we'll talk about the two West series and how games went and adjustments

for the rest of those series. So looking forward to that. You're listening to the Hockey Pediocast, as always streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network. Breaking down the top stories in the NHL every day. The Jeff Merrick Show. Subscribe and download the show on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. We're back here in the Occupedio cast, run by Jack Hahn,

talking about game one, round two for all four matchups and adjustments. We can see the rest of the way. We've done the Eastern Conference already. Let's move to the West. Do you want to talk the game we saw most recently, Knights Oilers, because it had high expectations heading into the series, and it was quite a barn breader in that way. Lots of back and forth action, a bunch of goals, a very high event.

It was an exciting game. I think, you know, the Oilers certainly gave up much more off the rush than I expected heading in. And maybe I shouldn't have because that is sort of the bread and butter for the golden nights. But it was more than they gave up at any point in that avenue in game one, or round one against L.A., certainly. So it was a bit of a change in that way. but what were your sort of impressions of that game and kind of what went wrong for Edmonton

defensively and then kind of what they can do to sort of bounce back and get back on track in the series? So my favorite part of the game was actually during the intermission when Dallas Hekin was talking about playing on the wall. And he talked about a concept that I've been kind of practicing for a long time with my players, which is 80% of time is spent with the puck on the wall or near the wall. So when you look at NHL hockey, there's a lot of play along the boards. And the teams that can get that puck off the boards and into the middle of the ice have a huge advantage.

And that's essentially the battleground where games are won and lost because that really is a number one factor in determining whether your team has quality possession. or not. And he sort of left it there because obviously you only had a couple minutes to make his point. But when I look at the Orioles play, like they have a lot of players who are really good along the board. Like McDavid is exceptional. Drysidal is exceptional. Zach Hyman is really good.

Amanda Kane, who Dallas-Eak incited, is also really good. So on and so forth. But the thing with the Oilers is I find it's strange because their players, you know, are very good at getting off the wall, but then I don't think they leverage it in a correct way. So if you watch the oilist play, they tend to have three forwards down below the hash marks. And what happens then is in case of a turnover, it's very easy for Vegas to get a three on two going the other way and isolating Edmonton's D's. So when you look across the league, many teams now, they're kind of flipping that triangle and they're playing with

two, three. So they only have two forwards deep. The third forward is really high, like almost at the same level as the D's. And then, uh, the D's then they feel more comfortable because they have three in a row and they're less vulnerable to on man rushes. And that's sort of how Vegas plays. Like when Vegas is just fighting for a 50, 50 puck where they're forechecking, their F3 is way higher. And when they win possession, F3 comes down and then he's skating kind of through the middle of the ice, um, for a high danger chance. Whereas for, for Eminton, they're already below the hash marks or even sometimes below the goal line. And what that does is it allows them to set up these kind of behind the net plays or these passouts

from the corner. But in case of a turnover, it makes them really vulnerable to on-man rushes, which is how Vegas got a lot of their looks last game. Yeah, I think Vegas had by my count 18 rush shots at 515 in that game, which was more than the Kings had at any point in round one. and a lot of those were very high danger rush looks as well. Yeah, the problem is when they do isolate the defense in that way as well, the Oilers don't really have a backup plan or an ability to hang on

because other than I guess like the Eckhole and Bouchard pair, their defensemen aren't really suited to handle incoming speed. And particularly you watch, I know you highlighted him, but a guy like Vinnie D.R.NA as well, probably cannot play in this series. like he was a liability in round one, but just because of the way the Kings play and the sort of lack of finishing ability they had, you could get away with it.

You could kind of make it work otherwise. In this series, though, I think it's going to be a real problem and he'll be exposed. And so far this postseason, he's been on the ice for seven, five on five goals against in like 78 minutes. And so that's just not good enough.

And that's something there, it's on the one hand, it's like you don't want to put too much stock and blaming just the third pair of defensemen because they can only make such a big impact. But if they're on the ice for that many goals against, that that really hurts you. And so I think that would be a bit of an easier adjustment.

Just give Philip Rolberg those minutes. Potentially, we need to see more cool act than CC in this series as well. But I don't know, if the Golden Knights are going to keep getting that volume of looks, that would obviously be very concerning. I think that's going to be a point of emphasis. And it seemed like it was in the post game, right? The Oilers kept saying, like, this isn't representative of, like, how we play and what we're used to giving up.

And so maybe there's hope. that that's not how game two and beyond will look like. Well, there's, there's sort of this one thing that's very representative of the Orler's doing the whole McDavid era, which is when things started going badly, when things start going bad, the forwards and these,

you see this gaping ocean of space between them. Like, they're not very connected. And I think that's, that's why only Drysidal was able to find the score sheet last game was because he's kind of that one rare player who's able to, when he's on the ice, connect the forwards and the D's and then get his looks kind of by creating a passing network. Whereas everybody else, like if you look at even McDavid, like he stretched way up ice and then the D's are trying to find him.

And then, you know, inevitably the puck is turned over and then the D's are sitting all the way back. I've never seen Emminton's neutral zone defense be as passive as it was last game. Like Vegas will be entering the zone and the two defensemen will be standing in the low slum. lot. Like if you want an example of a good passive 1-2-2 neutral zone forecheck, you look at Vegas. Like their Ds are inside the defensive blue line, but the forwards are, they're nearby, right? They're applying good back pressure and it's almost like skating into a four-man box,

which only McDavid can, you know, regularly cut through. Whereas Eminton, the Ds are way back. The forwards are not quite in sight. And then there's a ton of space for Vegas to play with on the entry. So that's something that's, I think the oldest coaching staff are well cognizant of that. And that needs to be fixed for sure. Yeah. Yeah.

I mean, guys like Michael Amadio and Ivan Barberchap were just like waltzing into the zone and just having field days. And so that obviously can't continue. You mentioned like Dreisetta was the only one that scored. I know McDavid got stripped at the end there on the empty netter and he had a few sort of like the puck bounced on him. And he obviously didn't score himself. but I thought it was very encouraging because while he had the straight line speed in in round one, you know, there was some concerns that he had gotten a lower body injury. We saw that tape of like him kind of stretching the leg out and favoring a little bit

in practice during that series. He speaking, and we can go back now, circle back to Dallas Egan's comments on kind of getting off the wall and sort of board play. That's something that when McDavid is humming, it's one of his most underrated qualities, in my opinion. It's that kind of like explosion off the wall in the offensive zone where he's able to pick a puck up and just and just dart immediately to the net and either get a scoring chance or dish it off to someone for a grade A. And he was doing that much more in game one to my especially as the game went along in the third period a few times. They nearly got the tying goal

just based on those efforts by him. And so if that explosion in burst is kind of back in that area and he does that, that's something I'd look for moving forward. Now, the issue. issue in this series is the Golden Knights are one of the best teams, in my opinion, at kind of like working lanes and using their sticks to just disrupt. And so it's a tricky team to try to stick handle through. But if anyone can do it, McDavid probably is a good candidate to do so. So I tweeted this kind of tongue-in-cheap, but I tweeted last night that McDavid should try the Michigan. And the reason I say that there's actually a schematic reason, because when you look at Vegas defending their zone,

they prefer to front as opposed to box out. And the perfect example is on the Amadio goal off the rush. So what happened was the Orlers threw a point shot at the net. And then the Vegas defenseman, instead of boxing out, the Oralist play out front, actually stepped up ahead of the Oralist player, blocked a shot, and then that sprung Vegas for a quick rush that Amadio scored out.

So basically what Vegas is doing in their D zone is by not boxing out and by fronting the net front threat, they're actually putting more people in the slot where the oilers like to create their chances. And in addition to that, Vegas, relatively speaking, they're pretty passive once the puck is behind the net, because they know that the oilers, they are going to go behind the net, and then they're going to look for a passout. let's say, you know, if McDavid goes there, he's going to look for Hyman out front or he's going to look for dry side all kind of at the back post. So by kind of just sitting there and waiting and holding the post,

Vegas is taking away those high danger passes. But on the flip side, what they're vulnerable against is McDavid just scooping the puck up and then, you know, making a quick move and then just putting this under the bar coming out the other side. So again, I don't remember McDavid ever doing it or scoring on. it in a game. I know he can do it because he's the best player in the world. But at some point in the series, if Vegas is holding the post and not chasing him behind the net, I would like him to try it because that's the correct play to make. Well, and that was the strength for his

weakness or strength for strength that I was excited about heading into this series. It was that oilers offense and kind of how they get those looks from that inner slot versus Vegas. We're all year. This wasn't just unique to this one game, right? Like this is all year. under Bruce Cassidy, they've done such a good job at basically boxing out and not allowing you to get looks from there and then keeping you to the outside and other teams just sort of relenting and living with what they give them. And that's why they were able to get such good goalie performances out of the rotating cast, the guys that you wouldn't expect. And in game one, I think through the first two periods, like the Oilers didn't have a single shot from that kind

of like inner slot area from the net front out. And so that that is something they're going to try to have to break through and that's interesting to kind of spread out the ice and use that to their advantage because if that's not somewhere they're going to go, like that's an area you could exploit. But I don't know. You're right. It's weird. I don't really remember McDavid ever actually utilizing that. You'd think that given how fast he plays and all the other cool goals he scored that we would have seen that at some point by now. Yeah. So who knows? Could be an iconic Stanley Cup moment. Well, let's see. Let's talk a little bit more about Higgins' comments there because I think people wanted us to focus on that here because when he dropped the 80% of the game is played there,

like if you extend that out a little bit, then it seems more reasonable, certainly just purely limited into the boards, especially in today's game, seems a bit aggressive. But I know that it is something that is probably the most kind of like underrated in terms of how much time and thought we give to it just as fans watching, right? Because we focus so much on all the rush stuff and all the east. West passing, but just getting it off the wall, particularly those really little simple plays that he highlighted of the puck has rimmed around to you. You've got a pinching defenseman crashing down on you, providing pressure, and you basically got to knock the puck down and then get it into

what he called good ice, quote unquote. And so that is a very valuable skill that a lot of people are working on very extensively. I know Daryl Belfrey, like, harps on that a ton with his players and all of it. It would like very high skill players at that. And you do as well, as he mentioned, So that's something that probably deserves more attention when we're kind of breaking games down and thinking about what's happening and how goals are created or prevented because it's like the first play and sort of chain reaction. And depending on how you handle that, it's a crossroads or it could go to wildly different directions.

Yeah. And I'm really happy that he spent time discussing that because I think it goes a long way toward dispelling a lot of the myth about hockey and where a lot of, of players go wrong. Like, you know, when we think about playoff hockey, we think about playing physical and getting a front of the net and blocking shots and boxing out and, you know, tipping pox and scoring dirty goals. But really, playoff hockey is all about getting off the wall. So instead of saying get to the net or, you know, shoot from everywhere, it's more about getting off the wall because once you do, you know, especially with these NHL players, once you're off the wall, the world is your oyster.

But once you're on the wall, you're really limited in terms of what you can do. So for me, whether I'm working with players in a development or a coaching role, whether I'm scouting players, you know, if you can't get off the wall, you're going to be really limited. And if you watch NHL players, I would say that's the biggest difference between maybe like an average second liner and a fourth liner with some skill. is that the fourth liner, he's going to be way less consistent at being able to make plays to get into good ice. Because once he is in good ice, he can score, right? Like there are fourth liners who can get 10, 15 goals a year because they have a really good shot

or they see the gun move the wall where they're really good passers. But the trouble with them is that they can't get off the wall and in which case they can't play further up the lineup. Yeah, that is kind of like the key dirty work in today's game. And in game one, like you saw for all the other stuff he did, and I think he had three assists and tilting the ice and all that good stuff, Matthew Kachukh against the Leafs, there were a couple times where he took massive hits in similar spots

where he was at like a high leverage point on the ice. And he knew that there was someone bearing down on him. And he still made, he like hung in there and made the play to get it to someone to extend the play for the teammates to work with to get into good ice. And so that's something that, you know, we talk about taking hit to make a play on all that. and certainly comes up more in the playoffs, but it's still probably not something that we're like focusing on and off,

especially when it's not leading directly to a goal and it's just extending a player, or helping you get out of the zone or attacking the neutral zone. And, and you know, a team that does that very well is the Dallas Stars. And maybe this is a good segue to finishing up, talking about them, especially up top,

right? Their fourth line is whatever. But they have some of the best players in the top six at doing so. And that's something that is going to really be a key against the Cracket. and how they handle them. They really struggled with the Cracken's defending speed and their forecheck in game one. And so I'm kind of curious to see whether they're able to make that adjustment. And as I mentioned yesterday, one thing they desperately need to do is split up that Godforsaken, Yanni Hakumpah, S.L.

and Del Pair, like I cannot believe that is a thing in 2023. But it was in game one. And so hopefully that'll be a change for the stars in tonight's game two. Yeah. So you mentioned Luke Hughes with Devils, but I agree with. you when it comes to the stars like Niels Lundquist needs to find a way to get on the ice because

the thing in the series is that Dallas, you know, they have a lot of good experience, skilled older players where as you said they're really savvy, they get off the wall really well. The main takeaway I had when watching the first game was their defensemen

were just giving them too many bad pucks and it was difficult for them to overcome that and then Seattle would how fast they play, they would get the puck back in the neutral zone and really hurt Dallas off the counterattack. So I think Lundquist with the way that he can, you know, find the middle of the ice and complete exits and help on entries and activate through the middle, he could really help.

And also, like when you look at Seattle, aside from Morgan Geeky, who's a big body, they don't really have a ton of size up front. Like that's not how they play. They'll, they'll be the aggressors with their speed on the forecheck or what their, their skill off the entry. but they're not like Carolina. Like the one area that I'd be concerned with with Carolinas, they crash the net, they screened, they tip-pucks,

they take second chances, they score greasy goals. Seattle is more about creating space with their speed and their skill. So a player like Lundquist, he can read those plays and he can just get the stick in the way before Seattle gets set up and then that helps Dallas, you know, leave their zone and then get on the counterattack. So I think Lundquist would definitely be a next factor, during the series, if Dallas brings him back into the fold,

uh, as you said, you know, the, the Lindel Hock and Pa pairing, like, I don't even think they need six. Like, they can play with shovels for a lot,

right? But, um, or I think Seattle's a good matchup to, to dress, uh, kind of more undersized puck moving D's because, because that's,

that's the game that they, they play. Yeah. Yeah, you're right. There's, there's many more kind of physical considerations or requirements playing against Carolina.

Like, it's, it's one thing to break out against the whorecheck, but then you also have to, like, deal with Jordan Stahl in front of the net and stuff like that. It's much more difficult. I think my only concern about that would be, like, when's the last time Niels Lunk was played a competitive game, right? Like, it's a very tricky spot with the speed,

especially that that game one was played at and how the crack can attack with that speed. Like, it's a tricky spot to throw someone in after that much time off and just be like, all right, deal with this and make some stuff happen. on the fly. Now he's very skilled and he's a pro and if anyone can handle it, a guy with his theoretical skill set should be able to fit in this series, but it is also tricky. I wish they had found ways to get him in sooner, but, but you know, they won round one obviously so it's tough to complain and maybe they felt like because of the way Minnesota played, it wasn't a good matchup for him. But I think certainly here, like they should consider that much sooner rather than

letting this, letting this get out of hand. Yeah. And I'm not saying they have to bring him in right away for game two, but it's, again, it goes back to the idea that as a coach, you need to have a baseline of what's acceptable and what's not. And, you know, maybe, you know, that Lindel Hock and power pair, I mean, you did only lose in overtime. So maybe you run it back, you see where that leads you. Maybe, you know, your team as a whole performs better. But at some point, you got to think, okay, well, I can't stick with this because at the worst case, we only got three more games. So at some point, yeah. Don't you think that that's the type of change that you want to make at home though

where you can manage the minutes a little bit more? Like it feels like particularly with the Devils and Luke Hughes, if they lose like game two on the road, for example, game three at home would be the way you go. And maybe you go 11 and 7 and then you can, you can play them situationally more so depending on what's happening and, you know, what shifts are afforded there. But throwing him in on the road particularly if you're down to nothing

and you can't really help him if he's drowning. Like that's, that makes it even trickier in my opinion. Yeah. The one thing that would be a mitigating factor, I think, is if Pavelski, I mean, Pavelsky scored four goals. So I guess he did okay. But if he's really healthy and they can put him back with Robertson and hints, now the stars have three good lines. And then they can maybe kind of disassemble the fourth line to play 11-7. Again, like the whole 11-7 thing, coaches hate that because now you have kind of an odd number of defensemen. and kind of an odd number of forwards, which makes bench management a little bit more difficult. Oh, no, you have to do your job.

No. Yeah. So like every single coach I work with, they've hated 11-7, and basically it was like pulling teeth every time, whether it was, you know, Peter Smith at McGill, whether it was Sheldon with the Leafs and Marley's. Like from a bench management perspective, it's just, it increases your workload. So I think that's why they don't like it.

But if the good coach is when you give them compelling evidence that certain players helps them and it's worth that tradeoff, then they're going to embrace that. Yeah. And like I was going to say, I've really liked what it's done for the Oilers because it's gotten them chances to get Joyce Idol or McDavid out with like Coston and, you know, whoever else. And that's actually yielded great offensive results for them in round one. Now in game one, Matthias Yannmark goes down early again and they're left with 10 forwards. and it becomes certainly a little trickier,

but I think that was sort of like an extreme outlier of where it can go wrong. I think for the most part, I don't mind it. And I think having to do more work in terms of managing your bench is not a good enough excuse for particularly in the full season. That's why some of these staffs are so big. And you have so many assistance back there. I think they can put their minds together and cobble together good minutes for all those guys.

So I'm not too worried about that. But, you know, one thing I think that is notable here is, and kind of to wrap this up in the theme of the show and the adjustments and all that, something that I think is an underreported and underappreciated quality of the lightning during their championship window over the past three years or whatever was their ability to, regardless of the game one result and how it went, you could visibly see that tactically and the way they played as the series went along, they were able to sort of get their bearings, kind of recalibrate for whatever opponent was in front of them, and then play to that and sort of adjust

their game and especially the speed at which they had to play. And so that's something to keep in mind for as you watch all of these series and how some of these teams adjust and adapt after losing game one. So I'm really curious to see how it happens. I don't know. Maybe maybe I'm over like maybe it just comes down to the players need to play better and execute better. And what you mentioned with Oilers like just tighter gaps, better connectivity between their players. You watch them tape, you hammer that out. Maybe I'm putting too much stock in coaching adjustments and how the impact personnel can make and all that.

But I'd like to think that there is a way to go back after a game one loss. and make real changes that can help influence game two. So the last thing I would say on this is, you know, I think at this point you're expecting maybe a bit of a hot take, but I would not be surprised if every single team that lost game one this round to come back and win the series. Well, we saw that in round one. Yeah, I think that would, I think, and I'd be happy with that

because the four teams that I picked the win round two are lost game one. So it would certainly help help me out. All right, Jack, this was a blast man. Thanks for taking the time during a busy part of your schedule, navigating the trials and tribulations of becoming a new dad. Let listeners know, plug your ebook a little bit here because I think it's particularly valuable in the postseason at the start of all these new series where you're trying to figure out your

opponent and how they play and sort of little set plays that they run. It's very useful for that. I know I've used it quite a bit. So let the listeners know about that and whatever else you want to plug. Yeah, so this time of the year, I'm sure you're, you know, we're all watching a lot of hockey with our friends. And if you really want to get a leg up and kind of, you know, tell them I told you so, go get my ebook. I've diagrammed out the five-on-five in special teams plays of all 32 NHL teams. So when something happens on your screen, you know, things happen really fast in the playoffs.

But if you, if you read my e-book, not a lot is going to surprise you. So you can get it at gumroad.com. It's called Hockey Tactics, 2023. All right, Jack, be well. We'll have you back on as this postseason progresses. Thank you to the listeners for listening to today's show. We'll be back tomorrow with another episode to close out the week of the Hockey PEOCast streaming on the Sports Day Radio Network.