Monday, April 14, 2008
McElhinney to start Game 3
Ah, just one of the nuggets to come out of an extremely jovial press conference this morning(? ...maybe last night) with Coach Keenan.
And rightly jovial, for sure. Not only is he obviously happier on account of being up 2-1 rather than down, but that improbable comeback saved him from having to face some difficult and very fair questions about his roster twiddling yesterday.
Duncan was on this before the game, but I had many of the same questions. Put briefly, it's, "You had a pretty good couple of games -- why all the jacking around before the puck even drops?"
Scratching Moss is baffling. He's a better player than Primeau, Godard, Nystrom, and Nilson. His presence in the lineup in San Jose actually created a 4th line that didn't look overmatched (or rather, two-thirds of one: for most of G1 and some of G2, Keenan was going with 4 C/LW combos and rotating Iginla, Nolan, and Moss through as the RW). It was Moss who set up Sarich to be robbed blind by Nabokov in the 1st period of G2. Etcetera.
Duncan is also right (here also) to note that Keenan has done well with in-game adjustments. Which leads to: why muck around with all the line combos at the morning skate, rather than adjusting on the fly? Can the players take any message from this, preparing for the game, besides, "we're going to play this differently now that we're at home"? And given that they were basically solid in those first two games, why would Keenan want to impart this message?
I don't want to make too much of this... the Flames played about ~55 minutes of pretty good hockey, with the coach's carefully-picked lineup. If Phaneuf, Vandermeer, and Tanguay don't come out with all the jump of three potted ferns, it's probably only 1-0 thru 5 minutes. And pulling Kipper for Joseph -- and then leaving Joseph in as the Flames clawed back on the scoreboard -- was unimpeachable.
Still, I'm not sure how many more games the Flames can start with the clear reality that their 12th (and 11th, and even 10th) forward won't be playing more than 3-5 shifts unless the game gets out of hand. It reduces, or eliminates, the ability to bury someone from the top 3 lines if they're not going well.
I don't personally believe that Keenan has an ego issue. He just wants to win, and he wears his affection for his players on his sleeve (witness the smile when Jarome scored his 50th, or his comments on CuJo last night). But it looks to me like, somewhere between Thursday night and yesterday afternoon, he succumbed to the temptation to "do something", where doing nothing was probably the more sensible course of action.
**Enjoyable game recap from Sharks guy Mike Chen here. Also, PJ Swenson at Sharkspage had this:
Dear Mr. Swenson,
They're not.
Regards,
Matt Fenwick
P.S. Go Flames.
And rightly jovial, for sure. Not only is he obviously happier on account of being up 2-1 rather than down, but that improbable comeback saved him from having to face some difficult and very fair questions about his roster twiddling yesterday.
Duncan was on this before the game, but I had many of the same questions. Put briefly, it's, "You had a pretty good couple of games -- why all the jacking around before the puck even drops?"
Scratching Moss is baffling. He's a better player than Primeau, Godard, Nystrom, and Nilson. His presence in the lineup in San Jose actually created a 4th line that didn't look overmatched (or rather, two-thirds of one: for most of G1 and some of G2, Keenan was going with 4 C/LW combos and rotating Iginla, Nolan, and Moss through as the RW). It was Moss who set up Sarich to be robbed blind by Nabokov in the 1st period of G2. Etcetera.
Duncan is also right (here also) to note that Keenan has done well with in-game adjustments. Which leads to: why muck around with all the line combos at the morning skate, rather than adjusting on the fly? Can the players take any message from this, preparing for the game, besides, "we're going to play this differently now that we're at home"? And given that they were basically solid in those first two games, why would Keenan want to impart this message?
I don't want to make too much of this... the Flames played about ~55 minutes of pretty good hockey, with the coach's carefully-picked lineup. If Phaneuf, Vandermeer, and Tanguay don't come out with all the jump of three potted ferns, it's probably only 1-0 thru 5 minutes. And pulling Kipper for Joseph -- and then leaving Joseph in as the Flames clawed back on the scoreboard -- was unimpeachable.
Still, I'm not sure how many more games the Flames can start with the clear reality that their 12th (and 11th, and even 10th) forward won't be playing more than 3-5 shifts unless the game gets out of hand. It reduces, or eliminates, the ability to bury someone from the top 3 lines if they're not going well.
I don't personally believe that Keenan has an ego issue. He just wants to win, and he wears his affection for his players on his sleeve (witness the smile when Jarome scored his 50th, or his comments on CuJo last night). But it looks to me like, somewhere between Thursday night and yesterday afternoon, he succumbed to the temptation to "do something", where doing nothing was probably the more sensible course of action.
**Enjoyable game recap from Sharks guy Mike Chen here. Also, PJ Swenson at Sharkspage had this:
If the NHL is serious about the saftey of its players, and serious about the dangers of allowing an entire team multiple unfettered opportunities to take shots at a player's head, then there needs to be a serious review of the Calgary Flames actions in Game 3 and a possible suspension.
Dear Mr. Swenson,
They're not.
Regards,
Matt Fenwick
P.S. Go Flames.
# posted by Matt @ 4:18 pm 
Comments:
For better, for worse, I dunno, but PJ's also put up some slo-mo video up on Sarich's hit at BoC.
The main thing going against PJ? Only one team's fans want to see Sarich suspended. That's 28 less teams than were clamoring for Pronger's head.
I watched it, and couldn't see anything new. No doubt it was elbow and head connecting, but I think 2-3 (20, 30, 50) years of experience has taught us that if the guy doesn't really lift his elbow much (which I don't think Sarich did), and the timing of the hit was legal (which it was), then the league has no interest in punishing it. For better or for worse.
(And the last guy I'm listening to complain about it is the guy who has a sudden interest because it happened to his player.)
Yeah, I can't say it's that troubling by me, either. Then again, I've always been drawn to the idea of a bloody Patrick Marleau.
Incredible finish last night (yeah, I know, obviously). Between that and the Ducks, Rudy Kelly is smiling ear-to-ear.
He just wants to win, and he wears his affection for his players on his sleeve (witness the smile when Jarome scored his 50th, or his comments on CuJo last night).
Is Cujo one of his favorites now? That would be news to me. And Glen Sather.
Well, Colin Campbell was angry enough when I questioned him about the length of Owen Nolan's suspension to drop an f-bomb.
And in his explanation, he said the league had to send a message for hits to the head for the saftey of its players.
So I think I am just pointing out the obvious when I bring up Sarich's elbow to the head of Marleau. At least there is no more "it was a shoulder" comments.
And I think we both agree on the message sent by the league last night. You are going to have to goon it up and settle scores to win this series, and unfortunately that is the polar opposite of Ron Wilson's gameplan. Wilson sees only 2 points, even if those 2 points exist behind 20 bodies that want to bury your head in the ice.
I also don't know what the big deal was on the Sarich hit. The elbow is unavoidable in a play like that. If you want to target a dirty/dangerous hit from last night's game, it's the Phaneuf hit on Marleau against the end boards.
You are going to have to goon it up and settle scores to win this series, and unfortunately that is the polar opposite of Ron Wilson's gameplan.
Ron Wilson has a gameplan? That's news to everyone in Alberta.
PJ - only Sharks fans are convinced the Sarich hit was a "blatant elbow". Thats' why there's no talk of it being a shoulder hit...because it goes without saying. Even Marleau has admitted the hit was clean. If anyone was in a position to know about an elbow - and complain about it - it's the victim of the hit.
The elbow is unavoidable in a play like that.
If true, then should there not be a penalty for not controlling your body in the same way you get a high-sticking minor if clipping a guy was unavoidable in a play like that?
I don't think most people believe that Sarich should have been banned for life and, personally, on retrospect I wouldn't have even given him a game. But the guy should have at least gone to the box (and I do agree that Phaneuf's puck-what-puck play was far worse.)
I also don't know what the big deal was on the Sarich hit. The elbow is unavoidable in a play like that. If you want to target a dirty/dangerous hit from last night's game, it's the Phaneuf hit on Marleau against the end boards.
You're right IMO, but we all know the NHL punishes on RESULT and not intent. Sarich would be suspended for the rest of the playoffs if Marleau was taken off on a stretcher last night and missed a couple games. Since he's actually tough and got up and played, no review. That's the way the NHL rolls.
Now, Matt you talk about some roster movements, and it was either MG or Duncan that questioned why Hale would be inserted after it seemed as if Eriksson was the favoured guy (nevermind the fact Hale is obviously a superior player, it's the fact it went against an obvious coaching preference trend).
Well my friend works at at hospital here in town and he said he saw Eriksson come in the other day and he looked really messed up. I know 'everyone' is hurt this time of year, but it could explain the move at least somewhat.
You're right IMO, but we all know the NHL punishes on RESULT and not intent. Sarich would be suspended for the rest of the playoffs if Marleau was taken off on a stretcher last night and missed a couple games. Since he's actually tough and got up and played, no review. That's the way the NHL rolls.
I disagree. Either there is evidence that it was a dirty hit, or there isn't. I don't think the league would have any recourse for suspending Sarich. There really is no extension of Sarich's elbow, even if it did make contact with his head. And had Marleau not looked down into his feet to find the puck the hit probably wouldn't have been nearly as devastating.
Let's face it, had the Sharks won 3-0 last night, would PJ Swenson, or anyone else be hollering nearly as much about this?
If true, then should there not be a penalty for not controlling your body in the same way you get a high-sticking minor if clipping a guy was unavoidable in a play like that?
LB, can you try that one again? I honestly don't know what you meant, which makes it hard for me to tell you you are wrong.
What Lord B. is talking about is batted around every 6-12 months in the media... basically, making players responsible for their elbows in the same way as they are responsible for their sticks.
The NHL has had ample opportunity to make such a move; or to punish 'serious' elbows more harshly; or both. They haven't.
The reason is? They don't want to. Not the GMs, not the coaches, not the players. They don't want to eliminate the Sarich hit from hockey. They don't... want... to. Since accepting that, I've been a much happier & more serene person. :)
I'm not a fan of either team so consider myself relatively unbiased. My view:
Sarich hit = clean under current rules, he caught Marleau with his head down and clobbered him. I don't think he used his elbow as a weapon, he just steamrolled him with his whole upper body. Marleau was fair game ... he had the puck.
Phaneuf hit = illegal, dangerous, and dirty. By definition, since Marleau didn't touch the puck and another Flame touched it up for icing, it was interference. Because it happened in a hundred foot race for an iced puck it was a lot more than that ... boarding at the very least. Could easily have been called a major; no call at all was indefensible.
"Let's face it, had the Sharks won 3-0 last night, would PJ Swenson, or anyone else be hollering nearly as much about this?"
It could have ended his career.
Is Cujo one of his favorites now?
I think Mike Keenan's love of a player is directly proportional to that player's age.
Matt nailed my point. I should go to Calgary and hire a Flames fan to translate for me or something.
Of course, he's also right in that the NHL has no interest in policing this stuff. That's inarguable; the question to me is whether they should have an interest in it.
Holy crap, I'm in agreement with Andy about a hit. The Phaneuf hit is the one to complain about, not the Sarich hit. Phaneuf seems to have learned well from the Brazillian wax: head down, into the boards. It seems clear to me that Sharks fans focus on the Sarich hit because that was the turning point of the game, not the Phaneuf hit.
Incidentally, how much say do linesman have for calls like the Sarich hit? Because the photo in the Herald today clearly shows a linesman, sitting on the boards, watching the hit. (At least I think it's a linesman, you can't see where the orange armband would be.) If that guy has any say on a dangerous hit, he would have called. He didn't.
Of course, just to add to the fire, if you freeze the youtube video at the right time, you can see his left glove the moment before the hit. CLEARLY, his arm was extended and the hit was with his shoulder, not his elbow.
Might I interrupt this discussion of the anatomy of an attempt to injure with a hearty, enthused "SMASHVILLE!" Erat with the Most Exciting Play in Hockey(tm) and the Preds are making this a series.
Kick some ass, Predators. My hate is being spent on the Flames and Ducks but I sure wouldn't mind meeting Hasek and Zetterberg on a golf course in early May.
This is what drives me nuts...
There was at least 4 "stick" penalties last night where nobody in the rink (or at home) knew who was getting the penalty. Nobody knew because it didn't affect the play in the slightest.
Meantime.. Marleau gets drilled twice in the head. I agree that although the Saurich hit is not usually called based on the "current rules" it is inherently dangerous.
The stick penalties affect nobody but hopefully will lead to more scoring but not calling "head shots" will sooner or later destroy somebody's career or worse.
Just ridiculous IMO.
I disagree. Either there is evidence that it was a dirty hit, or there isn't. I don't think the league would have any recourse for suspending Sarich. There really is no extension of Sarich's elbow, even if it did make contact with his head. And had Marleau not looked down into his feet to find the puck the hit probably wouldn't have been nearly as devastating.
While the NHL does often evaluate suspensions based on the merit of the play, intent is often (if not always) a secondary evaluation.
I'm NOT implying the refs made a bad call in the Calgary game. They made the right call, I'm only saying it was influenced by Marleau getting right back up.
I agree that although the Saurich hit is not usually called based on the "current rules" it is inherently dangerous.
Much like hockey itself! But PJ is right, the first round of the playoffs is obviously the appropriate time for referees to establish an entirely new standard for legal bodychecking (total coincidence that he overlooks the actually-dirty Farnsworth hit in favour of the one that changed the momentum).
Now, for Mike Keenan's next trip: benching Jarome Iginla!!!
Please?:)
I didn't have a problem with the Sarich hit but Ugly didn't even care about the play; he just went after Marleau.
How that's not interference, I have no idea.
As for the Nonis firing, heard an interesting opinion from somewhere that the org did a little digging into their prospect depth and came to the conclusion that Nonis had been lying to them about just how many promising forwards they had.
I'm not about to make excuses for the doughboy or anything like that but even though he chose to tie up a lot of money in their D, some of that spent a lot of time on IR and it didn't help that Morrison missed a chunk of time too. Plus, Luongo's play struggled because life got in the way and that happens.
I'm not saying Nonis should've kept his job but I think it's an odd time to fire him.
Anyway, unless the next guy throws out an offer sheet, can lure some UFA help OR can trade some pitching for hitting, they're back to the same thing next year but they're probably better because Luongo's mind is a lot clearer.
Incidentally, how much say do linesman have for calls like the Sarich hit?
Since the second referee came in, absolutely none. I don't think they can even call majors anymore, honestly. Just too many men. At least, this is how I understand Ray Scapinello's explanation (and lamentation) of it in his book.
Farnsworth
Wow, someone else who knows that nifty little tidbit. I'd half-begun to believe my grandfather's source was in error somehow.
Post a Comment
<< Home
For better, for worse, I dunno, but PJ's also put up some slo-mo video up on Sarich's hit at BoC.
The main thing going against PJ? Only one team's fans want to see Sarich suspended. That's 28 less teams than were clamoring for Pronger's head.
I watched it, and couldn't see anything new. No doubt it was elbow and head connecting, but I think 2-3 (20, 30, 50) years of experience has taught us that if the guy doesn't really lift his elbow much (which I don't think Sarich did), and the timing of the hit was legal (which it was), then the league has no interest in punishing it. For better or for worse.
(And the last guy I'm listening to complain about it is the guy who has a sudden interest because it happened to his player.)
Yeah, I can't say it's that troubling by me, either. Then again, I've always been drawn to the idea of a bloody Patrick Marleau.
Incredible finish last night (yeah, I know, obviously). Between that and the Ducks, Rudy Kelly is smiling ear-to-ear.
He just wants to win, and he wears his affection for his players on his sleeve (witness the smile when Jarome scored his 50th, or his comments on CuJo last night).
Is Cujo one of his favorites now? That would be news to me. And Glen Sather.
Well, Colin Campbell was angry enough when I questioned him about the length of Owen Nolan's suspension to drop an f-bomb.
And in his explanation, he said the league had to send a message for hits to the head for the saftey of its players.
So I think I am just pointing out the obvious when I bring up Sarich's elbow to the head of Marleau. At least there is no more "it was a shoulder" comments.
And I think we both agree on the message sent by the league last night. You are going to have to goon it up and settle scores to win this series, and unfortunately that is the polar opposite of Ron Wilson's gameplan. Wilson sees only 2 points, even if those 2 points exist behind 20 bodies that want to bury your head in the ice.
I also don't know what the big deal was on the Sarich hit. The elbow is unavoidable in a play like that. If you want to target a dirty/dangerous hit from last night's game, it's the Phaneuf hit on Marleau against the end boards.
You are going to have to goon it up and settle scores to win this series, and unfortunately that is the polar opposite of Ron Wilson's gameplan.
Ron Wilson has a gameplan? That's news to everyone in Alberta.
PJ - only Sharks fans are convinced the Sarich hit was a "blatant elbow". Thats' why there's no talk of it being a shoulder hit...because it goes without saying. Even Marleau has admitted the hit was clean. If anyone was in a position to know about an elbow - and complain about it - it's the victim of the hit.
The elbow is unavoidable in a play like that.
If true, then should there not be a penalty for not controlling your body in the same way you get a high-sticking minor if clipping a guy was unavoidable in a play like that?
I don't think most people believe that Sarich should have been banned for life and, personally, on retrospect I wouldn't have even given him a game. But the guy should have at least gone to the box (and I do agree that Phaneuf's puck-what-puck play was far worse.)
I also don't know what the big deal was on the Sarich hit. The elbow is unavoidable in a play like that. If you want to target a dirty/dangerous hit from last night's game, it's the Phaneuf hit on Marleau against the end boards.
You're right IMO, but we all know the NHL punishes on RESULT and not intent. Sarich would be suspended for the rest of the playoffs if Marleau was taken off on a stretcher last night and missed a couple games. Since he's actually tough and got up and played, no review. That's the way the NHL rolls.
Now, Matt you talk about some roster movements, and it was either MG or Duncan that questioned why Hale would be inserted after it seemed as if Eriksson was the favoured guy (nevermind the fact Hale is obviously a superior player, it's the fact it went against an obvious coaching preference trend).
Well my friend works at at hospital here in town and he said he saw Eriksson come in the other day and he looked really messed up. I know 'everyone' is hurt this time of year, but it could explain the move at least somewhat.
You're right IMO, but we all know the NHL punishes on RESULT and not intent. Sarich would be suspended for the rest of the playoffs if Marleau was taken off on a stretcher last night and missed a couple games. Since he's actually tough and got up and played, no review. That's the way the NHL rolls.
I disagree. Either there is evidence that it was a dirty hit, or there isn't. I don't think the league would have any recourse for suspending Sarich. There really is no extension of Sarich's elbow, even if it did make contact with his head. And had Marleau not looked down into his feet to find the puck the hit probably wouldn't have been nearly as devastating.
Let's face it, had the Sharks won 3-0 last night, would PJ Swenson, or anyone else be hollering nearly as much about this?
If true, then should there not be a penalty for not controlling your body in the same way you get a high-sticking minor if clipping a guy was unavoidable in a play like that?
LB, can you try that one again? I honestly don't know what you meant, which makes it hard for me to tell you you are wrong.
What Lord B. is talking about is batted around every 6-12 months in the media... basically, making players responsible for their elbows in the same way as they are responsible for their sticks.
The NHL has had ample opportunity to make such a move; or to punish 'serious' elbows more harshly; or both. They haven't.
The reason is? They don't want to. Not the GMs, not the coaches, not the players. They don't want to eliminate the Sarich hit from hockey. They don't... want... to. Since accepting that, I've been a much happier & more serene person. :)
I'm not a fan of either team so consider myself relatively unbiased. My view:
Sarich hit = clean under current rules, he caught Marleau with his head down and clobbered him. I don't think he used his elbow as a weapon, he just steamrolled him with his whole upper body. Marleau was fair game ... he had the puck.
Phaneuf hit = illegal, dangerous, and dirty. By definition, since Marleau didn't touch the puck and another Flame touched it up for icing, it was interference. Because it happened in a hundred foot race for an iced puck it was a lot more than that ... boarding at the very least. Could easily have been called a major; no call at all was indefensible.
"Let's face it, had the Sharks won 3-0 last night, would PJ Swenson, or anyone else be hollering nearly as much about this?"
It could have ended his career.
Is Cujo one of his favorites now?
I think Mike Keenan's love of a player is directly proportional to that player's age.
Matt nailed my point. I should go to Calgary and hire a Flames fan to translate for me or something.
Of course, he's also right in that the NHL has no interest in policing this stuff. That's inarguable; the question to me is whether they should have an interest in it.
Holy crap, I'm in agreement with Andy about a hit. The Phaneuf hit is the one to complain about, not the Sarich hit. Phaneuf seems to have learned well from the Brazillian wax: head down, into the boards. It seems clear to me that Sharks fans focus on the Sarich hit because that was the turning point of the game, not the Phaneuf hit.
Incidentally, how much say do linesman have for calls like the Sarich hit? Because the photo in the Herald today clearly shows a linesman, sitting on the boards, watching the hit. (At least I think it's a linesman, you can't see where the orange armband would be.) If that guy has any say on a dangerous hit, he would have called. He didn't.
Of course, just to add to the fire, if you freeze the youtube video at the right time, you can see his left glove the moment before the hit. CLEARLY, his arm was extended and the hit was with his shoulder, not his elbow.
Might I interrupt this discussion of the anatomy of an attempt to injure with a hearty, enthused "SMASHVILLE!" Erat with the Most Exciting Play in Hockey(tm) and the Preds are making this a series.
Kick some ass, Predators. My hate is being spent on the Flames and Ducks but I sure wouldn't mind meeting Hasek and Zetterberg on a golf course in early May.
This is what drives me nuts...
There was at least 4 "stick" penalties last night where nobody in the rink (or at home) knew who was getting the penalty. Nobody knew because it didn't affect the play in the slightest.
Meantime.. Marleau gets drilled twice in the head. I agree that although the Saurich hit is not usually called based on the "current rules" it is inherently dangerous.
The stick penalties affect nobody but hopefully will lead to more scoring but not calling "head shots" will sooner or later destroy somebody's career or worse.
Just ridiculous IMO.
I disagree. Either there is evidence that it was a dirty hit, or there isn't. I don't think the league would have any recourse for suspending Sarich. There really is no extension of Sarich's elbow, even if it did make contact with his head. And had Marleau not looked down into his feet to find the puck the hit probably wouldn't have been nearly as devastating.
While the NHL does often evaluate suspensions based on the merit of the play, intent is often (if not always) a secondary evaluation.
I'm NOT implying the refs made a bad call in the Calgary game. They made the right call, I'm only saying it was influenced by Marleau getting right back up.
I agree that although the Saurich hit is not usually called based on the "current rules" it is inherently dangerous.
Much like hockey itself! But PJ is right, the first round of the playoffs is obviously the appropriate time for referees to establish an entirely new standard for legal bodychecking (total coincidence that he overlooks the actually-dirty Farnsworth hit in favour of the one that changed the momentum).
Now, for Mike Keenan's next trip: benching Jarome Iginla!!!
Please?:)
I didn't have a problem with the Sarich hit but Ugly didn't even care about the play; he just went after Marleau.
How that's not interference, I have no idea.
As for the Nonis firing, heard an interesting opinion from somewhere that the org did a little digging into their prospect depth and came to the conclusion that Nonis had been lying to them about just how many promising forwards they had.
I'm not about to make excuses for the doughboy or anything like that but even though he chose to tie up a lot of money in their D, some of that spent a lot of time on IR and it didn't help that Morrison missed a chunk of time too. Plus, Luongo's play struggled because life got in the way and that happens.
I'm not saying Nonis should've kept his job but I think it's an odd time to fire him.
Anyway, unless the next guy throws out an offer sheet, can lure some UFA help OR can trade some pitching for hitting, they're back to the same thing next year but they're probably better because Luongo's mind is a lot clearer.
Incidentally, how much say do linesman have for calls like the Sarich hit?
Since the second referee came in, absolutely none. I don't think they can even call majors anymore, honestly. Just too many men. At least, this is how I understand Ray Scapinello's explanation (and lamentation) of it in his book.
Farnsworth
Wow, someone else who knows that nifty little tidbit. I'd half-begun to believe my grandfather's source was in error somehow.
Post a Comment
<< Home
