The Hockey PDOcast - The First Three Games of Canucks vs. Predators

Episode Date: April 27, 2024

Dimitri Filipovic is joined by Thomas Drance to talk about the first three games of Canucks vs. Predators, the game scripts we're seeing so far and how they've been by design, and adjustments moving forward that could make a big difference in such a tight series. 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.

It's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filipovich. Welcome to the HockeyPedioCast. My name's Dimitri Vovic and joining me is my good buddy Thomas Strands. Tom, what's going on, man? Hey, bud. In Nashville, enjoying what's got to be, like, this Connects Predator series has got to be the weirdest series we've seen in the first round so far, right? It's just felt like there's no flow or key dynamic in some ways.

It's like every period feels like a totally different game, much less every game. The swings have been massive. Two of the three wins have felt divorced from the results or the process we've seen on the ice. It's been a really interesting one, almost like a fitful start to this series, a series that the Canucks now lead two to one after a big two one win at Bridgestone Arena last night that I covered. You are the hardest working man in showbiz. people should know you're up and at it. You're reporting live on scene here in Nashville. You just said the morning after last night's game three victory by the Canucks and we're going to chat about it.

You and I actually, I said this on the podcast earlier this week. You and I recorded the morning after game one. And, you know, people are saying that they got to listen to it, that it was the best show we've ever done. But unfortunately, it never made it to the light of day because there were technical issues. And so we weren't able to release it. It'll just have to take our word for it. But you were very prophetic in it. You dropped a bunch of takeaways and observations.

You saw kind of starting to materializing game one that wound up being true to form later on. We're going to talk more about those. But you're right. I think if anything, like you've been in-house for all three of these games, right? You've been in the rank. You've been watching them. It's probably one of those series that, listen, it's playoff hockey. And certainly if you're rooting for either these teams or you're just watching at home,

I think you can appreciate how tense it is because it feels like every goal is just so much more magnified because there's so many fewer of them than in some of the other series. And so there's like that drama. You got a lot of shot blocking and hitting and physicality and all that stuff that we kind of associate with hockey. So I think you can certainly appreciate it. But it probably is one of those that translates better to the live in-rink experience, I think, because of all those things.

Whereas if you're watching at home, it can be kind of a little choppy or there can certainly be large stretches where there's no real meaningful events happening. And so if you're tuning in for that, you're probably like, left being like, oh, man, nothing's really happening. This is kind of a rock fight. But I imagine in the rink, like you're seeing a lot of this stuff and kind of this chess match between these two teams that are trying to figure each other out and sort of duel essentially for kind of like who can control the way they're playing these games.

Yeah, I mean, I think both teams are wildly well prepared, you know, that's been sort of one of the big takeaways from me is, I mean, I think. I had a lot of time for both Rick Tocket and Andrew Burnett before this series. But the way both teams are just little things. Like you're seeing wingers jump and like pick off the first pass after faceoffs. You know, like the you can even see little stuff like that. It's just so clearly pre-scouted. Like you, the way that this, the way that the matchup game has sort of played out,

kind of the way that teams have adjusted and got the rival team sort of stuck in the mud in game two and then game three. You know, the Predators forecheck, which I mean, you could find it on a milk carton in game two, like completely savaged Vancouver last night. Rick Tockeet talking post game about needing to make some adjustments in the neutral zone and on the breakout. Like that's a credit to the Predators, right? sort of this series is kind of this series is kind of I guess despite an absent

E dynamic I think one thing we've noticed is when the Predators Forecheck plays they can control play when it doesn't it feels like they get bogged down in Vancouver's end and then it's so extreme once a team takes the lead and I think it's because there are so few shots are so few goals in the series we're seeing some pretty

extreme defensive shells when teams are leading late and that kind of adds to the drama adds to the probability of comebacks, you know, which, which really has been decisive in this series. Like the Canucks have managed to eliminate a Predator's lead in game one, entering the third period. The Predators weren't able to do that to Vancouver, you know, sort of by the skin of their teeth last night, like Vancouver wasn't able to pull game too close, despite 25 minutes of like dizzying territorial control and a whole variety of chances. Every miss, you know, like Ryan O'Reilly

shoots at an open net, but it just hits Ian Cole in the face. It's like, that's, that, that's so similar to like the Dakota Joshua chance at the tail end of game two where he, you know, has his initial stop shot stopped by Saros and then hits the post, right? Those misses just looms so large in a series where there's like 40 shots both ways max. Well, it's so funny to hear you note that the coaching of this and I completely agree, but someone in the PDOCAS Discord yesterday during the game as it was playing out

kind of made the reference to how this is kind of reminiscent of like remember when 3 on 3 overtime first started and it was just this like pure adrenaline rush and everyone, no one knew what to do with it and then so it was just like playground hockey like

we were just like going back and forth and then coaches got an opportunity to like devise game plans and sort of sink their claws into it and then it's become kind of what it is now. It's always like, this is essentially like the playoff series version of that

where like both of these coaches have found a way to their credit to really leave a lasting impression on the series. And I think that's why you're seeing how difficult it is for these teams. I've also sort of, I'd make the point that I'm not sure about momentum in terms of like game to game because I do think especially with days off in between there's an opportunity for teams to reset, watch video, get back to the drawing board and kind of figure it out. But I think you are seeing the sort of lasting effect of like how what happened in one game is seeping into the next one as well, right?

Because in game one, the Predators below that third period lead. And then I think that informed their decision in game two to just park the bus and create this defensive shell the way they did in the back half of that game to preserve that lead in game two. and then in game three you sort of saw the Canucks essentially like play the Uno reverse card on them where it was the exact opposite. And I think part of that is also like, while I'm sure the Predators were happy after game two, anytime you win, particularly in the road in the postseason, you get a split, you're going home, you're pumped about it. I imagine Andrew Brunette was looking at that and being like, all right, it's probably not ideal that we sort of were this conservative because this isn't the way we played all regular season. and so you knew they were going to make a point of coming out and being very aggressive in front of the home crowd in game three. And the Canucks, true to form all season, got that lead. And then we're able to sort of play this way.

Now I'm sure Rick Talkett is going to be preaching the same message where it's like, it's great that we won and we're comfortable in this environment. We probably want to have more than 12 shots on goal as well in game four. And then so it'll be fascinating to see kind of what that next domino to fall is. Well, it was funny. Me and me and Harmon, who are watching the games together and we're filing right at the are these like takeaways, quick columns at the athletic. We're sitting there and the connects are just absolutely shutting the back door all night, right?

Like the predators have all this possession, but they, the predators want to get to Smith moving laterally before they're shooting. And they're not really testing him even from dangerous areas as much as they're sort of trying to make one extra play, right, to make their shot more dangerous. which, by the way, I don't think it's necessarily a bad approach, but the Canucks were living, you know, in those lanes. Like their ability to shut the back door last night. And I think the Predators sort of slow adjustment,

finally, Evangelista scored on exactly the type of play I'm talking about. The Predators felt a little bit slow to adjust to just testing the goaltender. And like, after the game, Rick Talk, it comes out and he says, you know, we weren't good in the neutral zone. we weren't good on the breakout, but we were good in the defensive zone, and that's exactly what Harmon and I had been talking about, which is sort of similar to,

like game two, I didn't feel like the Kinnucks had, quote unquote, dominated the way it felt like everyone else who'd watched the game was talking about. You know, I thought Vancouver, for all of the time they spent in their own end,

for like their ineptitude, frankly, breaking the puck out, like an uncharacteristic level of ineptitude, and that's something we'll get into. you know, I thought their defensive zone coverage was legitimately very strong and the Predators just, their execution was just off. Like there were a couple of times, I don't know if this showed up on TV, but there were a couple of times where like on, on sort of a rush chance with a defenseman either having just changed or coming in sort of late taking fourth man's ice. Like they just got missed and the Predators lost a really high quality scoring chances result that they did lose.

The Canucks did lose a Predators forward right in front of the net with about 30 seconds to play, and the Predators just didn't quite clock it. So, you know, the margins in this series are fine. And I thought the Canucks defensive zone coverage was good. I also thought Nashville's offensive execution was uncharacteristically off. And, you know, we'll see in game four. One thing about this series is I really, you're right that I think there's an evolution of game plans that we're seeing across a game by game basis. but the flow, the momentum, the way the series has looked game to game has been almost completely different.

With sort of, which brings us kind of to the one takeaway, this is just something I want to ask you about. I've been thinking a lot because for those who know me, I cover the Canucks, right? So, and I worked for the Panthers before that. And so with the exception of the bubble in 2020, like I haven't really covered like a Canucks series in a long time. I'm trying to think about how to talk about small sample hockey, right? A lot. With this game three coming right on the heels of a game two that, as you said, the Uno reverse card effect of it, I feel like I've seen Nashville's best attribute, right,

which is their ability to generate scoring chances five on five, kind of pitted against Vancouver's best attribute, which is the ability to lock things down five on five and drag a game into the lot. And game two, I saw a lot of the Canucks or game two I saw sort of the Canucks have to chase against the Predators. And, and, you know, Vancouver doesn't generate a lot, five on five offensively. The Predators have been good defensively, but sort of shaky in terms of the environment that they create for their goaltender relative to how the connects to it. And it just felt like the Canucks were more dangerous pressing in game two.

than the Predators were in game three. Like, it almost felt to me like we got to see a pretty raw distillation of both teams' best thing last night. And I think I like Vancouver's best thing. Like, I think Vancouver's strength is stronger than Nashville's strength in this series as just like a takeaway. Just like one of my game three takeaways was that fair or unfair, because I'm not saying it with a ton of certainty,

given that at the end of the day, it's just one game in a game that Canucks won, despite having 12 shots, because DeSmith played the game of his life. I think that's very fair, and it's reflected at both ends of the spectrum as well, right? Because the Canucks, while we've talked a lot this season about how there's so much better suited for getting up early and then protecting that lead and then sort of hammering that playing style, if you saw how game two unfolded, the way they were able to sort of build on that offensive zone time and then get a bunch of shots. I'm with you that I don't think they really were, I don't think it was a great game plan by them because they were sort of playing right into Nashville's hands. And I made that note about how you were very prophetic after game one and talking about it.

What the reference was there was you were noting how Nashville had totally changed up their defensive zone scheme where they were fronting significantly more of the way Vegas does and essentially just baiting the Canucks into taking all of these spray and bray shots from the point in the perimeter. and they were just living in the lanes, absorbing all of them, not even letting anything get the Zarros, and that's how you got this sort of comical stat where it's like they had more shots blocked than shot attempts until like the final minute of that game essentially, right?

And it looks bad on paper because they're not generating much themselves, but being up 3-0, they were very comfortable playing that way. But the Canucks are able to sort of build on that way. When the Canucks go up like they did in game three, they're able to sit back and defend, and that's not necessarily what Nashville wants to get into from their own

offensive generation perspective, right? Like there weren't that many actual rush opportunities and ability for them to get out in transition because the Canucks were very comfortable just sitting back and spending time in the defensive zone and taking away all the dangerous options. And so it looks good that Nashville finally wound up getting a 30 shots. That's much more sort of in line with their regular season numbers from a generation perspective. But ultimately, I know like Ryan O'Reilly got a few very good looks. in tight and I had a few empty nets and if he hits one or two of them, all of a sudden

maybe it's a different story. But also, I think you're totally, you hit the nail on the head there in terms of like these two games kind of showing the difference in what the teams are comfortable with, where they're best at, and then how that's related to sort of the game script. Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, this Kinex team, I think they have hit this defensive level where they can, whether they play well or not, all.

of these games feel like they're one shot games. Like they're coming down to one shot, right? Now, obviously there's multiple instances where it could be that one shot, but the point being that the margin is non-existent. There is no margin in these games. It is, and I don't want to say down to luck, but it's down to execution. It's down to whether you, like that, because Ryan O'Reilly hits Cole in the face on the five on three chance, but he also has that sitter that he puts just wide in the

the first seven minutes, right? The J.T. Miller goal, so key because the first goal is so key in this series, like, it's a Nashville clear. J.T. Miller attempts the same shot. He did it twice because they were in sort of a wedge, which means they were skinny. The Nashville penalty kill was skinny. Whenever he sees that, he's going to spam that downhill wrist shot. Like, that's how J.T. Miller thinks.

He doesn't try it as often against diamonds. You have to work to set it up against a diamond. Miller knows that right away. And so he's spamming that shot. He gets one. It's blocked. The predators have a chance to clear. And they,

and they, they just clear it directly into Quinn Hughes. Like, I don't even know if Quinn Hughes saw it. He didn't even make, because Quinn Hughes is amazing at like playing shortstop at the blue line and sort of keeping clear its attempts in zone. But this wasn't one where he had to do that.

It's like, you know, there's 50 feet of ice, but there's Quinn Hughes right there and it just hits him. And I swear, I don't even know if he saw it or had a chance to react to it. It was just that the, Preds penalty killer put it into the one spot he couldn't.

And then Miller takes the shot again. It's a beauty. And the opening goal, like these games are coming down to one play, one shot. And what I'm curious to see in a world where the Canucks advance, for example, is like,

can they muddy it up against a team like Edmonton if that's, if that happens to the point where it's a one shot game? Because if it is, you know, that's advantage. to a team like Vancouver, right? Like that's not what a team with the best hockey playing human on the planet

and another top five guy and another 50 goal scorer want to see. They don't want a game against a less skilled team to come down to one shot, one bounce. But that's sort of what it's looked like in this series, which honestly, coming out of game three, I mean, the Kineks will have a tremendous opportunity to take a stranglehold in game four here.

But this one just feels like this one just, feels like it's going to go longer than this because I can't see the difference between these two teams. It's very much the corporate wants you to identify the difference between these two pictures, right? Like, there is no difference between these two teams right now. Well, I was going to say the minimal margin hockey is like, I think of that Bain quote about darkness. And it's like the conductors actually being like, you like, you've adopted it. Like I was born. I was born in this darkness. Like, there's so much more comfortable in this type of environment. It's by design, right? And I think that's, yep, I've seen a lot of conversation about, like, we sort of noted it

off the top about how maybe when you're watching on TV, some of these games, you look at the shock lock, right? And it's like seven, six, and it's like halfway through the second period. And it's a one-nothing. You're like, oh, man, this is ugly. I'm seeing very few sequences where there's back and forth action, where teams are actually stringing together passes. And I've seen, seen, I think people mischaracterized that as the reason behind it being Nashville not being talented enough compared to this Canucks team, right? I think that's a been, especially in this market, been a big topic of conversation about the two teams' respective talent levels and how Nashville is sort of being, quote unquote, out talented in this. And I just don't think that's

the case at all. Like, I think the Canucks certainly have a ton of individual talent, as you, as you see and you're familiar with the names, you're going to see that at the end of season awards. But it's a mischaracterization because it's like just a misunderstanding of what made this Canucks team so successful and effective this year. And it was like their workmanlike mentality and grinding stuff out and winning in that type of way as opposed to being this sort of skill team that just puts up crooked numbers on you on the scoreboard. And so I think the reason why these games are playing out this way and why they're so ugly in some sense is because of the Canucks actually and not the Predators. And that's not an insult at all, right? Like I think that's a test.

the job Rick Talked's done, I think it shows how much more comfortable they are. And we talk about this all the time in these playoffs series, right? It's like the team that is sort of able to steer the game state into their preferred pace and environment is going to be the one that wins, right? Like you want to force your opposition to play your game. And it feels like that's what the Canucks are doing here. Even in a game where they got out shot 30 to 12, the Predators, especially like in that final five to seven minutes or so, I think. did start to break through a little bit and kind of get some looks. But ultimately, like, this is the type of game where I think the Canucks are not only comfortable

playing, but would prefer, and maybe even especially so without their starting goalie, right, where they're trying to sort of insulate their backup and make life easier for them, as opposed to exposing them to this situation where they're trading rush chances with the Predators team and all of a sudden they get themselves into trouble. Yeah, like, I almost wonder if the Predators need to insert some recklessness, because as much as the Canucks will be super disciplined about making conservative puck management decisions, like there are opportunities that you can't resist. And I almost wonder if the predators at some point are going to need to take a chance,

like leave themselves vulnerable to a two-on-one or a three-on-two, you know, in order to get the opportunity to counter. like we're sort of reaching that stage at this point just because even when the predators are dominating possession the way they did yesterday like I what they had seven or eight shots in the final seven minutes right like it wasn't until the final five minutes that the predators really started to feel like they were putting Vancouver under duress you know Vancouver didn't have Vancouver was under siege in the first period and sort of for the last five minutes of the third. But in between that, it felt like Vancouver was very much comfortable playing

Canucks hockey. And Canucks hockey is not Miller and Pedersen and Hughes and the quote unquote skill players for the Canucks doing fancy things. It's a one two two deep heard the team into the neutral zone, right? And lock things down. I felt like Vancouver locked things down for the vast majority of time as they just killed clock in that game. And that's got to be frustrating for Nashville, even as I think the Predator should come out of that game with, you know, an awful lot of things working in their favor, like things that they will feel, guys like O'Reilly who've won cons mites, guys like Shen who have cops, guys like McDonough who have cups, they'll come out of parts of that game thinking, hey, we drop that one, but there's a lot of stuff that we think

is going to matter for us as this series goes along. And Hughes struggling to break the puck out in particular, something we never see, like never see, I think would be top of that list. I think we actually should talk more about that, but I assume we got to go to break. No,

well, I just got one more point on this, then we'll go to break and then we'll talk about Hughes. I can tell that you have your own radio show here because you've got all the beats hit here. Managing the clock. Of course. What I was going to say, though,

is I actually do think the Predators, you can always kind of go more extreme, but I think they have tried to bait the Canucks into playing their game because you're still seeing, like, in the offensive zone, for example, they are still trying to pinch and forecheck really aggressively,

and they're committing guys down low, which is opening up neutral zone space for the Canucks in their own zone. Whenever they get the puck, their forwards are flying the zone, and they're trying to, kind of stretch out the Canucks and hit those long bombs. They've done that well, actually.

But the thing is, is like the Canucks are generally not falling for the trap. They did in game one a little bit funny enough. I think like it was a clear feeling out process. I think there were a few instances where I think they got Tyler Myers on like, he jumped in on a three on two, for example, and like created this rush chance.

And it's like, all right, well, that's good. But also I think the predators will live with that. And in fact, they would prefer for the Canucks to engage in that. and sort of embrace it because then that's going to open up stuff for them.

And the Canucks have been really disciplined and meticulous about not really falling for it for the most part in these three games and making those sort of puck management decisions accordingly. And so that's why you're getting these games where the shots on goal so far 22, 21 Preds, 18, 16 Canucks and then 30 to 2012 Preds. But scoring chances so far, I've got them 52 to 49 for the Canucks, which shows you how tight I think it's been. Now, to put those numbers into perspective in three games, same as this series, the Oilers have 92 scoring chances against the Kings compared to 52 to 49. So just to give you some perspective, obviously, two different series. But I think that also sort of shows you how these games are being played and how wildly different they are. And so it just a remarkably low event game environment. And this also isn't something like I think we spent so much time talking about how the Canucks were not a one-trick pony, but sort of the margin for air.

for them was lower because they had to play one specific way and they hadn't really proven that they could thrive in different environments. The same in an inverse can kind of be said about the predators, right? They were such a high volume team and so aggressive offensively this season that

they would just, I think, get teams to kind of play that way and then that benefited them and they never really were forced to or able to play this way before. And so that's why when they get into a game two when they're trying to protect the lead and they're like parking the bus and a bit scarred, by blowing a leading game one.

I think that's why they looked so bad as a result. It wasn't just that they were being conservative. It's like they really had no idea how to play that way, right? And so I think that's like the regular season is used as kind of a testing ground for this stuff to prepare you for the playoffs. And I think that's what you're seeing in these games. Yeah. I mean, I think you're right.

And I think the dial, the predators can't turn the dial, right? They need to play aggressively all game long in my view, if they're going to win this series. Like they really need to tattoo the old John Tortorella safe as death saw like on the inside of their eyelids. Whether they're up or not, they have to keep blowing the zone. They have to keep those aggressive pinches at the blue going because I just don't feel like they have that B game to drive play without it. No, they don't. Okay, let's take our break here.

And then we come back. We'll jump right back in and keep chatting with you. You're listening to the Hockey, Ocast, streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network. Right, we're back here on the Hockey P.DO cast with Thomas Drance. Tom, we were sort of hinting at this before we went to break, but you were talking about Quinn Hughes and his breakouts and how that's being challenged as this series progresses. Now, natural statrix somehow has him down for seven hits taken in these three games.

I believe they had him down for like three in the first period yesterday. I'm skeptical. And then no more. Yes. I'm skeptical on that, though. I saw Sissons dump him in the second. I promise you. The NHL.

recorded no hits against Quinn Hughes in game one. And I saw him get mashed multiple times. Like the Predators have been on it all series. I wonder if some of it's happening away from the puck, maybe more than I even realize. But I don't think the hits numbers are accurately reflecting the size of the target that the Predators have put on Hughes's back over the course of the series. And last night was the most noticeable,

not just because they tagged him twice off the opening. shift, but because all night long, they were in his grill. And these hits aren't, these hits aren't dirty, but they are hard. They are hard hits. The predators are coming hard at Vancouver's top pair. Yeah, they are finishing their checks, certainly. And it's clearly a concerted kind of point of emphasis for them in their game plan. And it should be. You see that in the postseason, certainly, right? Like what Vegas has done essentially the last two post seasons to Dallas's most skilled defensemen and going after them. And you think in particular, only to the volume that Quinn Hughes shoulders all season in terms of ice time, in terms of

how often he has the puck on his stick, how responsible he is for everything on the breakout, and really in all zones, but let's say particularly in this case in the defensive zone where he's more likely to be hit. And it makes sense that that would be, especially in a seven game series, the cumulative effect of that, I think, is real. And I'm sort of curious after game three to see whether that results in him potentially getting rid of the puck more quickly and trying to kind of make shorter, safer plays as opposed to his usual where he holds on the puck longer than eight other defensemen because he's constantly

kind of keeping his dribble alive like Steve Nash, right? Kind of moving around the zone, trying to get open, trying to probe, and then eventually attacking when that presents itself. And like, listen, he's still in a lot of these, I think, does a good job of protecting himself because he's so elusive that he's able to like spin off of it and he's just got such a good feel for it, but they're certainly getting home on these much more than I think we're used to all seasons. So regardless of what the total is, I think they must be happy with how they're executing that part of the game plan.

And I'm curious to see, I guess you're arguing that you already started to see some of the effects of in game three, but I'm curious to see how that progresses and sort of whether it forces any changes in the game plan and the way the Canucks themselves are operating to sort of protect him a little bit just because of how important he is to everything they do. So when you consider that Quinn Hughes had the puck for what, like 50 more minutes than the next closest defenseman and how rarely he takes contact relative to how frequently he carries the puck. I mean, there's a slipperiness that's sort of definitional, like a definitional in terms of what to expect when watching Quinn Hughes. Like he's, he's a master at avoiding contact that he's getting, that they're getting home like this so frequently on him, you know, to me,

a product of like, this is game 85 and this guy plays huge minutes. And we all know that over the course of a long season, there's going to be wear and tear and nutrition, especially on the highest usage players in the NHL. I saw Quinn Hughes go glass and out last night. I'd never seen Quinn Hughes go glassing out. It was so uncharacteristic. And I think that's sort of the bare case, right? If you're going to watch game three from the perspective of,

like the nervous Nelly Kinnux fan, right? The like fatalistic Kinnux fan who just like can't get over all the accumulated scar tissue of 54 years. If there's signal that could be negative for the Kinnok's over the balance of the series, it's sort of the idea of this, which is what would it look like if Vancouver's one-man breakout machine was no longer able to, you know, for whatever reason, warp. the environment of the game, right? Exert their usual gravity on just like, I'm going to individually transport this puck

and now we're set up for a heavy shift and now the forwards are changing and now we've had the puck in the offensive zone for 90 seconds, which is just like a Quinn Hughes special at this point. What would it look like if the Canucks didn't have that weapon in their bag, that arrow in their quiver? I think it might look a lot like last night. And so,

bank, that like to me, that's sort of line item one of things. that if we see again in game four, if we see again in game five, will auger badly for the Canucks. If the dynamic of this series does not include Quinn Hughes and Philip Peronic being able to at will flip the play, you know, and if these hits over the course of the series serve to mute, or at least turn down the volume of Quinn Hughes's usual loud impact,

I think that's, you know, that's a recipe for a seven game series and a, and a series that's going to be decided in a, in a wash of sort of coin flip games. And I don't think you want that if you're Vancouver with a two one series lead at this point. Well, I think part of it is is game planning in the postseason where you're preparing for the same opponent. You can really be more aggressive and sort of, like, intentional with your design in this stuff. And so I think that's why Nashville is having been more successful. because I don't think this isn't necessarily anything new, right? I imagine every team that was playing at Canucks this season was like, we need a point of emphasis for us tonight if we're going to be effective,

is to give Quinn Hughes trouble. We can't just let him hold onto the puck and have fun. But good luck getting into him in the first place, right? He's just so good, as you said, at dodging those and getting, getting free. And so the fact that Nashville is getting there as often as they have, increasingly so as his postseason series goes along is interesting. I think that also feeds into the Canucks 5-1-1-1. five offense, which I wanted to talk to you a little bit about because I think that was something

we were going to be looking for heading into this series. Now, I think both teams have scored five such goals so far, and that kind of speaks to just like how tight and narrow the margin is. And I think the Canucks can get away with it in the series because they're so good defensively and Nashville doesn't have necessarily many other avenues for creating themselves. But if you're just thinking about a longer playoff run or potentially facing Edmonton in round two or even anything beyond that, I think that's something that they're going to have to figure out. And maybe there are no other options because this has been kind of a trend for them in the second half of the season where the offensive generation of 5-and-5 is really kind of

stagnated and dried up. And they become much more of a get the puck up high, shoot from the point, hope for the best team. And it makes a little bit of sense in this series as we've spoken about because I think one of U.C. Soros' relative trouble spots is because he's so small. dealing with all this traffic in front of them. The Canucks are so good at getting bodies out there, creating issues for him, taking away his eyes, and then trying to get the puck past him.

So it makes sense in this series. But I also think, like, you see the limitations of it sometimes, like, in a game, too, where it's like, yeah, you're going to get a lot of shots, but what did it ultimately amount to? And so I think it's a bit of a dangerous game or a kind of like a needle that they're trying to thread here. And that's a bit of an issue for me. Yeah, which sort of brings us to the adjustment that swayed game, like naturally

dovetails with the adjustment that swung game three, which was the Canucks bumping Connor Garland off of PP1 and replacing him with Elias Lindholm. Lintholm, I thought, had a really tough night, but he also had extreme defensive deployment, and they were in a shell for the whole game, so it's kind of hard to contextualize, but I, you know, he led the Canucks in ice time in two, five, five, five, but the, yeah, but so the, they flip Garland and Lindholm, which results in a change in formation. When Garland is in because of his passing from down low, the Canucks use him at the net front, right? The pint size net front guy, sort of a very NHL in 2023 lineup decision that the Canucks have been rolling with for, you know, about 10 games. Maybe maybe the last nine games the regular

season plus three, so 12 games. They switch that up. And Brock Besser, who is significantly wider and significantly larger, goes to the net front. He's the screen. on the Miller goal. And in fact, Miller on that downhill shot, if you watch it, he times the release for when Soros looks right around Bessor and then he shoots it far side to the left with the idea being that literally Soros shouldn't see this until it's past him. Brilliant. Brilliant operating from Miller shooting through that layer traffic. And then and then Bessers gets the key insurance marker, the game winner on a really cool. little move at the net front just sort of freeing his stick up but but the feed by miller is gorgeous and and if you watch sort of that replay like there's a replay from sort of a nice level you can see that miller never gives the play away with his eyes like it was we talked a little bit on the podcast that never aired which was so good about all the deception on every evangelista

touch on the power play well if evangelista has you know the 101 class down on that like what we saw for Miller is like the Ph.D. level. And what we see from Kuturov on on every game basis is like deity level. But, you know, it was that level of playmaking from Miller. So moving Besser down to the net front really swung that game, really got the Canucks power play going, which, you know, isn't a surprise. I know Kevin Woodley thinks Besser's been one of the most effective screeners in the league. So I'm guessing that's a reflection of clear sight data. And he's right. I mean, Besser sort of has played everywhere for the on the power play over the years. He kind of was,

he came into the league as a left flank trigger man, like a high volume, uh, one time option. And it, his one timer was never as dangerous as his wrist shot. And as Miller sort of mastered, you know,

that part of the ice, it dislodged Besser. I don't think he embraced right off the hop being this net front guy. And then slowly, especially after the club lost Tyler Tafoli, and he got reps there, you know, his work as a playmaker from down low became really good.

Like he became really essential in Bo Horvats' goal scoring explosion because of the sort of low to mid pass that opened things up from Bessor, or sorry, for Horvatt from down low. And now his screen game has gotten like really imposing. He was a big factor in Vancouver's power play getting off the Schneid last night.

That was a key adjustment, like the key adjustment. like the key adjustment. You sort of try to, after the Canucks adjusted their first power play unit at practice, you know, it didn't trigger in my mind that Besser at the net front could swing game three, but it did.

That was a, that was a timely flip-flop of personnel for the Canucks, one that paid massive dividends right off the hop. Yeah, I mean, they didn't score a power play goal in about 12 man advantage minutes in games one and two combined, and then they scored both. their goals in this 2-1 win on the power play.

So that's obviously the big difference there. And I think it extends beyond that because we mentioned the 5-1-5 kind of struggles. The power play, it's sort of, I think, more quietly maybe for like league-wide audiences. I'm sure, like the local one was certainly quibbling about this. And we saw a lot of them like tinkering with moving guys around and trying different stuff down the stretch. But they were 24th in power play efficiency as well from the All-Star break on. And so getting that going and squeezing more out of a personnel group that theoretically should be much more lethal than it had been for a while now is important should give a bunch of credit to J.T. Miller as well, right?

Like that was such a alpha performance, I thought, in terms of just like how much of everything they did revolved around him. Now, listen, they had 12 shots on the role as a team. But he had six of those shots himself. 13 chances as a team. He either took or a set up, nine of them had the goal. had the primary assist on the second goal. Everything ran through him, and he was a monster. And so that was the big difference.

And listen, like, what's interesting in the matchup game here in the series is we've been noting in games one and two, we saw so much Miller versus McCarron, right? And now in game three, the Predators, I think, astutely realized, like, listen, this is probably our biggest exposure. And so we saw a lot more Ryan O'Reilly. against Miller, I believe they played nearly seven minutes, head to head five on five in game three. And so I'm curious to see how that progresses as well,

because early on in the series, we basically saw as neatly as you can, head to heads of Miller versus McCarren, and then we saw O'Reilly versus Garland and Joshua's line with Lynn Holm, and then we saw Petters and versus Stevens, right? And so how that plays out, I think, moving forward will also be very telling, like, how Brunette's feeling about this,

and then what the Canucks can do with that. Yeah, and I think, The Canucks protected. I actually think the Canucks got away from the Miller-McCarran agreement that Brunette and Tocke had it in games one and two. Right off the, right off the hop, like one of the reasons they've played so frequently against one another is that both coaches have been pretty disciplined about every period McCarran starts, right? And every period the Canucks had answered on home ice with Miller last night, Tuckett knowing full well that Brunette's going to start the. McCarron line starts Lindholm. Like, I think he kind of reset the deck.

I actually think even though it's the Predators on Home Ice, I think that subtle decision contributed to freeing up, you know, Miller from sort of having to just like duel with a big body, sort of defensively oriented, fourth line guy like McCarron. And sort of by the time you get to the end of the game, you know, McCarran's primary head-to-head match. matchup was still Miller. Like that was still what Nashville seemed to be looking for with their fourth line.

It's just that Miller ends up playing more against O'Reilly because in some ways there hasn't been very hard matchups at any point throughout this series. It's been relatively soft with sort of a lean toward things like Sissons versus Pedersen and Lindholm versus O'Reilly. And then that arithmetic switched as we got to game three in Nashville. And I would suggest you, like, I think it's the Canucks. As much as, as much as Brunette had a little more control, you know, from the evidence, from the fact that McCarren's primary head-to-head was still Miller.

But the Canucks were able to free up Miller for other minutes. Like, I think it was the Canucks ducking that matchup, which is wild to say. But that's honestly what I think. I think that's part of what we saw last night. Well, would you say that Sizzins and Zucker in particular get, the better of Pedersen's line to the degree they have through these three games is probably the most staggering development of the 2024 postseason so far. Probably.

You know, probably. I mean, let me give you the numbers. So 16 head to head minutes so far at 5-1-5 in these three games. Shots are 12-1 Nashville, goals two-nothing. And I just think it's bizarre. And I think there's a lot more at play here. like obviously Pedersen himself is going to be the lightning rod for criticism here, partly because of the mistakes he made the wound up costing them in game too.

Also after he got his new deal and his reputation and expectations for him, like you just need him to produce. Right. And in the postseason, there's no real time for process in terms of like, because I could make an argument that I'd be much more concerned about him if he wasn't involved in any of these plays at all. Like I think he's had a few opportunities. He's had some chances along the way.

The puck's bounced on him. he hasn't converted and I'd be much more worried if none of that was happening, then I'd be like, oh man, like he's just not even in the picture at all. That's more concerning than when you are getting opportunities but not converting even though this alternative is kind of frustrating. But for me, like the concern here is you just have to ultimately produce at the end of the day. That's where you're going to be judged on the postseason, right? It's like it's a results business. You have to win four out of seven games. And if you're a top player and you're not producing, he has one secondary assist in three games so far.

I believe what, three shots on goal total, now a bunch of attempts and chances that haven't made it on that or haven't blocked. But he just has to add that then they'd be better. And I would expect him to, but I also would have said the same after game one and after game two. And so now we're reaching a point

where he ultimately just needs a signature performance because that's what he's paid to do. So I asked Rick Tocket last night, sort of a long winded, question probably longer winded than it needed to be but i was trying to get something pretty specific from him where you know miller coming into game three and like best are coming into game three had two shots on goal right um miller had one point uh the connects that scored one five on five goal with miller on the ice like there there just wasn't much happening for vancouver's top players

and and sort of i put it to him as like you're coming off a game two loss you haven't seen this group respond to adversity in the playoffs. You're without Demko. What does it mean to you? What does it tell you about your group to get this big performance from your top of the lineup stars? And let me, let me read you his answer. And tell me if you think it's an answer about J.T. Miller and Brock Besser or an answer about Elias Pedersen. I'll let you decide. Here's the answer. If you look at the Kahn Smythe winner last year, Rick Tocke began, Jonathan Marsha. So he didn't score the first six games of the playoffs. I think when Chicago won their cups, I think Jonathan Taves didn't score for eight games. Star guys are going to go through that. But if you watch

them, they stick with it. You have to have other parts of your game. So that's our guys and they're learning. If you're not scoring offensively, you've got to make sure you're good in other parts of your game. Then today, Millsie and Brock have a good game for us. That's just a lesson for our guys, whoever that's struggling. Make sure that other parts of your game are really good and eventually the offense will come. Is that an answer about Miller or Patterson? I love that. That's a lesson for our guys, wink, wink.

Whoever. Yeah. Whoever's listening. Whoever this could be about. Yeah. I mean, here's the thing. I think it's, and I think you agree with this. Like, on the one hand, because of who he is, it's going to come down to him.

I do think you need to view this through the context of his situation where he's clearly going through it a little bit, but there's no rhythm that's really helping him out or no kind of like cushion for him to land on because they start with like Lappertie and then and then McCabe's with him and Hoaglanders clearly like a lot of young players have kind of fallen out of the trust circle. If you just look at his ice tithe and how little he's playing similar to what's going on with Tommy Nobeck and Brunette on the other side. And now he's in this spot where he feels, I'm sure like he has to do everything himself because

he has no support. They're mixing and matching all these comments. combinations early on. They were trying to bring back the lot of line as well. And then you just kind of get in your own head and it all accumulates and snowballs and then you get to this position. Right. And so I think that's not to like alleviate him of any criticism because he certainly needs to produce more. At the end of the day though, I think it's a bit more complicated than just like looking at his production so far. I'm being like, oh, well, it's all his fault. Like I do think he's not really being put in necessarily in a position here where you would be

able to thrive. So I don't know. How do you feel about that? I mean, I do agree that his usage has reflected what you try with someone who's on the top of their game and feeling it. And it's clear that he's not. The defensive gaps, though, which weren't evident last night, but certainly were in games one and two, those are so uncharacteristic and that I find harder to explain, right? That that to me is different than the production thing. At least we saw him make one really creative play last night. He had that setup to Niels Hoaglander that was absolute, like a buttery setup that Hoaglander like just couldn't finish and it was a fabulous save.

Probably UC Soros's best save on the evening. So at least you're seeing flashes if you squint and like look for it with the most optimistic possible lenses. But, you know, there's just. just not enough going on there. And if Sissons versus Pedersen remains a huge edge for Nashville five on five in this series, uh, well, it's going seven. Like I don't know what else to say. Like, that's going to pull the Canucks into a longer series than, then they want. Uh, and severely limit their margins even further, especially because we've already hit the point where, you know,

Miller McCarran looks like a matchup that the Canucks would prefer to avoid. And we all know that O'Reilly, whether it's versus Lentholm or Miller has been a draw at best from a Canucks perspective. So, they need more. They just, they need more. And I think Tocke's commentary there

in a question that was not about Elias Pedersen, but it is hard to read in any other way. You know, I think the message there is the two-way game, man, like, we got to stop the bleeding in that matchup and then we'll worry about the offense. And I think his point

is well made in that you know, this is what happens. Like if you're going to go deep in the playoffs, you are going to have a star player be quiet, right? If you think about the Canucks in 2011, it was Kessler and then in Nashville series, it was the Twins against San Jose that went nuke, right? If you think about like that lightning run,

remember that lightning run and La Cavillier, like didn't have a goal for the first 10 games of their run and then just took over the Eastern Conference final. You're, you know, if you're going deep, you're going to have different times for different guys. And it certainly doesn't feel like a Pedersen series right now. But if he can at least find that two-way game, if he can at least start to drive a territorial edge against Sissons,

that would be a game changer. Like that would be a game changer whether or not he's the guy breaking games open or not in this series. And Tuckett seems to want to focus on those baby steps, at least if I'm reading his, his, the infancyvering. tension behind his quote the right way. Yeah, a little help would be nice.

And I do think Hoglanders... A little help would be nice. No question. Hoggler's activity in game three, I did think, was at least encouraging, right?

He had that chance that you mentioned that was set up by Pedersen. He drew the penalty. Like, it seemed like he was frustrating and protecting the puck a little bit more. And so, like,

they clearly need more of that. But yeah, that's something certainly to watch. Anything from the Predator's perspective, we've got to wrap up here soon. But whether it's talking about Evangelista, who I think has honestly

been Nashville's most dangerous player in these three games and is certainly going to be like getting garnering a lot more attention I think like we've been talking about him here plenty I think people are going to become much more familiar with him moving forward but he's been phenomenal any other stuff I'm kind of surprised that they haven't mixed up their deep pairs a little bit more to help out low zone and carry eight because I feel like they're just throwing them so far in the deep end and they're very mistake prone and I think can be pressured into more mistakes that's something I would be trying to We talked about how the Predators are targeting Hughes. I would be targeting that pair as aggressively as I could.

And we've already seen a few of their mistakes lead to critical goals for the Canucks. But any other stuff from the Predators angle in terms of like usage or matchups or stuff you're watching for moving to game four? I'm watching for Tommy Novak's minutes. That's sort of the one part of what Nashville's been doing that I'm struggling to understand because I think he's been pretty engaged physically. Maybe not in game one, but certainly game two, game three. I thought he started looking for hits, getting involved in sort of that side of the game a little bit more.

You'd think that the coaching staff would want that, would like that. And yet his minutes remain scant. And I think the predators are going to need that skill. You know, the predators, I think, are very much right there. and I think this series is extremely close and I think it's going to probably go long like longer than I'd like in terms of having to make an extra trip to the travel for games 5, 6, 7 will be grueling.

Yeah, which I love Nashville. I just don't love the travel. It's hard to get to from Vancouver. Here's my note on that because I think there's something tragically ironic and this isn't exclusive to just Novak and Brunette and the Preds, but like a guy like him, I get why the coach winds up not trusting him,

in the defensive zone. And so you look at like the deployment, McCarion's just getting all the D zone draws. And then they're like trying to like situationally put Novak out there in the offensive zone. But the issue is that the predators need to get out on the move and attack off the rushmore and create and transition. And Novak and Evangelist are probably their best bet for taking the puck from their own zone and making that happen and like enabling that. And it's not going to be McCarron's line. but because they don't trust them to start there,

they don't really get into those opportunities where they can actually functionally transition the puck that way and transport it. And so that's unfortunate because you're kind of shooting yourself on the foot. And I think it's just it's bonkers. Like I know like you're talking about how the Canucks are trying to free up Miller from that matchup. I just,

McCarron playing this much more than Novak through three games is truly staggering in my opinion. And so for predators, especially in a game where they're traveling throughout. Yeah. especially in a game where they're trailing throughout. And again, I've been really impressed with how the predators have approached this series with Brunette in general. But, you know, one thing I'm just watching for is it feels like they feels like that middle six for them has been a difference maker.

Whether it's Zucker, whether it's Bo Villiers, whether it's Sissons, whether it's Evangelista, Novak. It feels like those minutes have been when the predators have looked most dangerous in some ways because of the fact that the top of the lineup is kind of getting played. to a draw by that Lindholm-Miller soft match. And because their fourth line has done like a creditable job in difficult deployment, like that bottom six needs to be heard from. And, you know, the opportunities haven't been as large as I think their territorial edge has been. Like there's a little bit of dissonance there. I'm really curious to see if that adjusts.

And if Nashville's middle six can keep having this level of five-on-five success territorially and frankly they've also been able to generate a bottom line through three games going forward. Okay, Tom, well, we've got to get out here. So I'm going to let you go. Everyone, go check out Thomas Rance on Twitter, listen to Canucks talk here on the SportsA Radio Network

on 650 and follow his coverage of this series at the athletic. Tom, we're going to check in with you again soon. Have fun out there, try not to get in too much trouble in Nashville. That's all for another week of shows here for us. Thank you to Tom for coming on. Thank you to the listeners for coming along for the ride for us. Enjoy

this weekend of games and we'll be back on Monday with plenty more of the Hockey Ocast here on the SportsNet Radio Network.