Can't Pin Game 1 Loss On Michael Leighton
by Travis Hughes on May 30, 2010 3:26 AM EDT
in 2010 Playoffs
Email
Print
My internet was out for most of the night this evening, meaning I didn't read much about tonight's Game 1 while the action was going on. I checked in on Twitter a few times, but you don't get much opinion out of 140 character long messages. Nothing that makes you think too hard, at least. Because of this, maybe I didn't get the full picture of the game tonight as most people saw it, but what I saw a full team breakdown by the Flyers on the defensive side of the ice.
When my internet came back and I was able to see some of the reaction, I was shocked to see how many people were pinning the loss on Michael Leighton's play. Sure, Leighton wasn't great tonight, but I don't think his poor play was necessarily the reason the Flyers lost the game. As a result of not having the internet for most of the night, I'm not sure if this is the consensus tonight, and I haven't read any of the comments from the game just yet, but either way, it's not what I saw.
I saw a goaltender named Leighton who received zero help from his teammates. I saw a goalie who didn't play well wearing the jersey of a team that didn't play well. I'll go into more detail after the jump.
Let me start by saying that yes, Michael Leighton could've played better tonight. The entire team, however, excluding maybe Arron Asham and Scott Hartnell, could've played better though as well. It was a bad team effort, especially defensively, throughout the entire game tonight, and singling out Leighton isn't really fair in my opinion.
Let's break it down goal by goal, shall we?
On the first Chicago tally that tied the game at 1-1 in the first period, Troy Brouwer blasted a one-time pass from Marian Hossa by the sprawling Leighton. It was a shot that Leighton had no chance to stop, and the play was made entirely by Hossa. Luckily for him and unfortunate for the Flyers was that Ryan Parent had the task of bumping number 81 off the puck behind the net. Hossa schooled Parent, whose stick inexplicably flung to the far corner, giving the dynamic forward the chance to find Brouwer.
Can't blame Leighton on that one.
The second goal was probably stoppable by Leighton, but to blame him on it is pretty harsh too. Up a man, Braydon Coburn flubbed the puck at the Chicago blueline, giving Dave Bolland the chance to pounce on a breakaway attempt. He went five hole on Leighton, who actually stopped the puck before misfortune had it trickle up his stick and into the net. Given the shot by Bolland, Leighton probably should've stopped it, but again, to blame Leighton for allowing a breakaway goal is pretty harsh.
Leighton probably could've stopped the third goal as well, but in the same vein as Bolland's goal, Patrick Sharp's tally is really unfair to pin on one guy. It was a classic example of how Chicago uses their speed to their advantage. Winning a defensive draw, they drew the puck around behind the net up to the winger along the far boards. Chris Pronger pinched a little too far, and when the puck came out to Sharp in the neutral zone, he had plenty of space to turn on the jets with a two on one chance.
Now, Kris Versteeg's goal that tied the game at 4-4 was completely the result of terrible defensive zone coverage. In the slot with several Flyers around him, Versteeg was able to get two cracks at a loose puck in the crease. There was no challenge from Lukas Krajicek, who sat right next to Versteeg as he lunged at the puck, and that's just unacceptable.
It was the same story on Chicago's fifth goal, the second of Brouwer's night. Again teaming up with Hossa, Brouwer was able to sneak into the slot untouched where The Cursed One was able to feed him another perfect one-time chance. Leighton probably never saw it, but it didn't matter. Peter Laviolette pulled him, and the game was Brian Boucher's to save.
I think it's easy to look at a five goal onslaught and blame the goalie, especially when that goalie was pulled from the game in the second period. It's true that Leighton didn't make a big save when his team could've used it most, like on the Sharp goal or the Bolland breakaway, for example. But all season long, we've known that the Flyers can't rely on their goaltender, no matter who it is, to be the guy that bails them out.
They've gotten to this point of the season by being a solid defensive team that allows their goalie to see pucks and make the average saves. They know Michael Leighton or Brian Boucher or Carter freakin' Hutton isn't going to steal them a hockey game. So as they let their goalie down in Game 1 with a sloppy performance in front of him, they should've expected a loss.
Peter Laviolette said it best after the game. The Flyers lost as a team tonight. Blaming it on one guy isn't fair. However, with that said, Laviolette has a bit of a quandary here. While the game winning goal given up by Brian Boucher was very, very weak, he played pretty well in the 24ish minutes he saw in Game 1.
Most of the reports out of Chicago tonight seem to suggest that Leighton will be back in on Monday night for Game 2, but that's not a known fact yet. It's an interesting balance Laviolette has to strike -- go with a goalie who's confidence may have been shattered by the Chelsea Dagger, or go with a guy who's still icing his injured knees.
While the Flyers' starting goalie may be unknown for Game 2, one thing is sure: if the team in front of him can't tighten up on defense, it's not going to matter who's in the crease.
73 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The main issue
Is how lost he looked. From the start he let out a juicy juicy rebound. I thought it was just a bit of early nervousness but that was the story of his night. Sure you can’t pin all the blame on the goalie on a 2 on 1 or a breakaway, but look at how deep he was in the net on both of those chances. He did not challenge the shooter at all…it’s almost like he didn’t have the confidence in himself and (in the 2 on 1) his D to come out and take on the shooter and eventual goal scorer.
The whole defense played badly tonight, but Leights made some very questionable plays.
by PursuitOfLappyness on May 30, 2010 3:46 AM EDT reply actions
Did anyone else see the pre-game locker room footage of Leights?
In the lead up to the game, NBC cut to the locker rooms of each team and focused on ewach goaltender. I actual thought at the time that Leighton looked downright terrified.
394–129–3
Come on
Do you really give up this soon on a goalie had the first 3 shutout series in Flyers history?
Sure, Leighton made some bad plays. But who didn’t? The whole team played horribly. Travis is right- this is not on Leighton, this is on everybody.
I really don’t understand why this is even a question. You keep him in at least another game.
I'm now Kolb's biggest fan
Reid- Best Coach in Eagles History
McNabb- Best QB in Eagles History
This is the year
Sure, Leighton made some bad plays. But who didn’t?
Chris Pronger turned in one of the most dominating performances I’ve ever seen in a playoff game. He changed the game and tilted the ice every time he stepped on the ice.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on May 30, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
‘cept that one play where he was tentative on his pinch and didn’t get the man or the puck, which, sotra led to a goal. But yeah for most of the rest of the game .
by JerseyDriver on May 30, 2010 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I have a feeling this series is decided in Game 2.
If we win I think we get this series in 5 maybe 6 because you guys will take at least 1 in Philly. It’s going to be tough for us to win Game 2. I expect a much better effort defensively from both teams. I doubt we win if you shutdown our 1st line again but that’s a major task obviously. GO HAWKS!
Derrick Rose will lead us back to the promise land.
Give me Larry Brown as the Bulls coach!!!!!!
Brent Sopel Fan Club member.
Laddddddddyyyyyyyyyyyy
I haven’t gone back and watched replays of the goals, but I know my initial reaction on at least 2 of them was, “What is he doing there?” A bunch of people said it throughout the night, his positioning just looked awful. He didn’t look like the Leighton we saw just a week ago. He never seemed to challenge shooters, and on the breakaway, I remember thinking the he seemed way too far back. On the Sharp goal, it was the same thing. No cutting down of the angle. I’ll have to see some replays, but that’s what I remember off the top of my head.
I was happy hearing in the interviews after the game that the defense took their share of the blame, and that Lavvy agreed with that assessment. Leighton wasn’t great last night, but he was hung out to dry on a regular basis.
You’ll see Leighton in net for game 2 (unless he’s awful in practice and Boucher shines at the same time before then). I think he knows that he’ll be on a bit of a short leash for the remainder of the series, but it should also be noted that the defense will play better in front of him from now on (one sincerely hopes, anyway). We’ll know a lot more about the shape of the series after the next game – I think we’ve had our shootout for the Finals now.
Staying on the topic of defense, does Parent play any? Surely, Syvret or Bartulis HAVE to be better than he is. I wish we could find out if these two are available – are they hurt? We are basically playing with 5 defensemen, and the 5th one is a bit of a drop from the top 4 as well.
#1 Flyers fan in England (originally from Southeastern PA)
by Orange and Black Forever on May 30, 2010 7:30 AM EDT reply actions
As PursuitofLappyness theorized in the post game thread, Laviolette may has based his game plan on how we played against them in the regular season. We matched them in that game however, after a week of rest to think that we might be able to that again was a bit foolhearty esp. with the extra adrendaline boost the Hawks got from being the home . They opened the game up and we fell for it just like the Sharks did. Difference is we have more depth than the Sharks and are fast in our own right but not as fast as the Hawks. We saw what happened as we tried to match them – in 3rd we came out a bit flat but did finish strong. Pronger and Kimmo are 35 not 25. We need to play smarter to win. We need to slow the game down like the Predators. What the Predators lacked was our offensive depth. Both teams goalies had rough games that were not helped by their teams’ defense so the goalie factor was negible. If we won it would be remiss of the Hawk’s fans to completely fault Neimi as well. For me the real fault if you want to put it on anyone for such a coin toss of a game was Laviolette who in trying to drive a square peg in a round hole failed to adjust to a team that was basically played a run and gun on us. We should have slowed the game down. Laviolette got suckered into playing their game without the personnel to fully match it.
It’s an oversimplification, I realize, but I think Game 1 was essentially the younger players’ nervousness dictating play, and so there was a lot of openness, a lot of scrambling and giveaways and poor positioning. The only veteran from either side that consistently played with composure was Pronger (although I did like that Byfuglien had him barking up the refs early).
I don’t think it was Chicago’s game plan at all. I expect the whole of the next game to be more like the third period. (Note: I’m not predicting a 1-0 shutout with Kopecky potting the goal.)
www.mjt.org
Simply put leighton played fairly awful and needed to get pulled. However, i say that this game couldn’t. Have been worse for flyers. They looked awful on d except for pronger owning the toews/Kane/b boy line. Kimmo was just averge. Coburn and carle looked like this was their first cup final game. Just lost half the time.
Leighton back jn goal for game two.
Annother thought. I think jvr is great and all but in actually in favor of benching him for car bomb. And having Carter center a giroux/asham line.
by manko on May 30, 2010 7:52 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
When I say leighton needed to get pulled it is to protect him. It would have taken a golden goalie effort to stop the hawks the way we played. And he just didn’t have it in him.
by manko on May 30, 2010 7:57 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
This game
was terrible and painful to watch. It was even worse than the Game 3 against Montreal, ’cause this time, you as a fan had no time to breathe… I mean, the lead swinging from one side to another along with the momentum, I was close to heart attack towards the end.
As for Leighton… I absolutely agree with Travis. Even though I was yelling at my TV screen after some of the goals he gave up, he’s definitely not a goalie you can leave in the net alone, hoping he’d steal the game for you. He might have saved us during the first periods against Montreal, but the Hawks are not the Habs. So again, I think Leights is not the one to be solely blamed, as Travis pointed out, it was the poor defense in front of him and with the exception of the Hartnell-Briere-Leino line and Asham, the horrific performance of the whole team.
Though, it might have been the pressure, the nerves, the Chelsea dagger, the fans in the building or all that together, but Leighton did seem very nervous and insecure in the net. So pulling him was the right decision to do, imo. Here’s the hoping he puts this game behind him and comes out strong tomorrow (or at least stronger than last night). If he’s in the net, that is… which I hope he is.
As J Reed said in his comment, this is not the way we should play, this is not the way we can beat the Hawks. We can’t let them come to our zone so easily, we need to trap them in the neutral zone. Slow them down. I believe the Flyers regroup, realize that they can’t outskate the Hawks in our end and they get back to the Bully hockey again (without taking penalties tho, which was I believe only one positive from last night). Just try to keep it simple. Thank you.
Wow, that was long… sorry for that :)
I love the Lightning AND the Flyers... go ahead, preach me!
The irony of last night's game.
Boucher was going to be the only goalie that could have won that game for the Flyers. We all know that Boosh is erratic and maybe not that positionally sound at times, but he will , on occasion, rob guys blind and makes stops that he shouldn’t make. In a tight game, however, he’s prone to an absolutely brutal soft goal (as we saw last night).
Leighton on the other hand is the guy you want in net when you have a team actually playing D in front of him. He’ll be where he needs to be and allow the defense to do most of the work. But if the play gets blown up he’s just not… I don’t know… instinctive?… enough to just start making crazy ass saves.
I don’t think Lavi had any option but to pull Leights. He seemed overwhelmed from the start, and the team seemed disinclined from cohesiveness. Pulling Leighton was the only option he had to grab the attention of the skaters.
That being said, Leighton should definitely start game 2 because he gives the Flyers the bes chance of winning when they play their game. If they continue with this gawdawful pond-hockey horseshit, you could stick Roy back there and it wouldn’t make a difference.
.
394–129–3
This game showed me The Hawks need to worry. After winning a series with 3 shutouts and most of that one in Boston, I am not suprised we had a bad game. I looks good to me that in what looked like a decent game for them and they still barely pulled it out.
I wasn't even a year old but I stayed up to be outside the Vet with my Dad and Mom when the Phillies won the World Series 1980.
that's been the story
for us all playoffs. Hawks played poorly against Nashville and won. We played poorly most of the Vancouver series and won. We then got outplayed by S.J. and swept them.
It’s an opportunistic bunch. We play bad games and still win. Not saying that’s going to continue, but that’s just the way it’s been.
The same could be said for the Flyers too, really. There were a few games vs. Montreal where we got seriously outplayed, but still won. Against the Devils, we were outshot pretty much every game, IIRC, and we still won. Throughout the playoffs, I generally think we’ve outplayed our opponents, but we’ve been able to still a game or two when need be.
Offensively, it wasn’t a bad game for either team, even though neither team’s top lines produced. The defense was terrible both ways, with ours making more costly mistakes than Chicago’s. Either way, I wouldn’t take anything from this first game as being indicative of the Hawks needing to worry, or them thinking they can shred our defense on breakaways and go five-hole all night long (well, at least the shredding of our defense part).
exactly
both teams should tighten up their defenses. Although I expected a few high scoring affairs, each team will need to find different ways to win moving forward.
How do you feel about Philly essentially playing 4.25 D-men? You feel good about Pronger getting 33 minutes a night and not wearing out?
I really thought it’d be more of a defensive series, despite how deep each team’s offense is. Would have never guessed there’d be an 11 goal game though.
If you could tell me or Lavi where the quarter of a D-man comes from, that’d be great, haha. That situation really isn’t much different than it has been throughout the playoffs, other than the fact we’re now 18 games in, and I’m a little worried about whether or not Pronger can continue to play the way he’s been playing. He’s smart about the moves he makes, but the speed you guys have is a new kink in his game plan I think. If we can shave 5 minutes off his on-ice time without having Parent be the guy who picks up the minutes, I’ll be happy.
defensive series moving forward?
yes. That doesn’t mean these goaltenders aren’t going to fail miserably at times.
Regarding the 0.25 defensemen comment, was referring to your team’s top 4 D-men all playing over 25 minutes. Obviously they were great against our top line, but if they’re conserving energy against our bottom 3 lines, that should be something to worry about.
On the flip, if Campbell plays like he did last night for Chicago, we’re in for a ton of problems. Sopel should NOT be getting over 20 minutes a game. He’s one of my favorite guys, but he’s not young or fast enough to be playing those type of minutes. Especially against a deep and talented Philly team.
he's averaged under
29 minutes in these playoffs and 26 in the regular season.
Maybe I’m missing something…
outplayed by SJ
did you even watch a game? you don’t sweep a team when you are getting outplayed.
by Coz_Bulls_Fan on May 30, 2010 9:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Keep in mid Both
sides were off on both sides and in net. Neither team can really point to how this game helps them out, but can point at many things to be concerned about. The only real positive I can draw is the Hawks had 1 SHG, 5 EV Goals, and no power play. If this holds on EV (playing with or a little above PHI), the PP Chances will come. This will not only increase Hawks chances, but reduce Flyer Chances. This part actually reminds me somewhat of Game 1 WCF, Hawks no PP, but killed off 5 Penalties, and SJS threw everything at them, including the Kitchen Sink, but still won 2-1. After that, the Hawks made adjustments, Game 2 the Hawks owned, and for the most parts of Game 3 and 4, the Hawks controlled the game, and held off Bath Tubs being thrown at Niemi.
This part, I think would be of concern for PHI, 4-0 PP advantage 1-4 on the PP, but still lose. PHI will draw Penalties, against a team near a 20% clip. They need to clamp down on EV, or things may shift the wrong way for them very quick.
ART.I§8-11; AM I-XXVII
James Madison is my Hero!
by Toews-makes-funny-faces on May 30, 2010 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well said by an opposing fan. It’s sheer luck that we didn’t get called for at least two penalties last night, and the SHG allowed was unacceptable (not to mention I can’t think of a single thing Coburn did to redeem himself for that gaffe). If there’s anything to truly worry about from a Flyers perspective, it’s this.
Although the Hawks didn't get any PP
We did get some fortunate missed calls from last night’s goof troop. Burish luckily escaped with only a boarding minor. Hjarmalsson high sticked a Flyer in the 1st but Campbell was put in the box (Good for us since Hjarmalsson is a good PKer). And, obviously, the puck that hit our bench and led to the winning goal. It sucks that it seems like Bettman has taken another page from the NBA by employing idiot referees
I remember thinking that that puck hit the Chicago Bench, and didn’t hear anything after that. I’m glad someone confirmed it.
I think the refs were caught up in the moment as well. They were out of position quite a few times, and missed some blatant calls, (The Richards high stick (which honestly could have carried an intent to injure. No reason your stick does what his does from his back), at least two charging penalties, probably 5 or 6 interference calls, at least one trip on the faceoff drop)
On one of the Flyer goals, the bottom referee was above the faceoff dot during a 5 second scrum in front of the net… totally blocked to see the puck go in. He skated in well after the celebration had started, looked, then signaled.
That being said, Flyers played a shitty game. Blackhawks played a less shitty game. Neither team should be particularly happy about ANYTHING. Flyers D…besides Pronger, was terrible. Blackhawks are just letting the Flyers load the cannons at the point and fire. Though I do think the Flyers have something looking backdoor from the point shot. I said that all through the San Jose series…..everytime the sharks loaded up for a point shot, the off winger was wide open for a one timer. Glad to see the Flyers actually tried that a few times (Briere just missed and Timmonen snuck in and shafted a shot wide)
Oh and the Campbel/Hjarmalsson mix-up. WTF was that? Campbell was at least ten feet away….. Another call from an out-of-position referee.
and 51 and 4 don't look a thing a like
unlike the 36/32 mix up in San Jose. I really do hope for new refs.
Watch it with the jinxing!
Time for some thrillin' heroics!
@Christopher A … I don’t see how you call that a decent game for the Hawks. The result was good, obviously, but Q is going to have a serious sit-down with a lot of players. I thought it was an awful game by both teams, and I thought we learned very little about how this series is going to go, ’cause neither team played anything close to resembling their “normal” game.
www.mjt.org
great that it was a close game, we can beat these guys
sad to see our d play they way it did and our forwards forget to cover their assignments
briere’s line was sick and while hartnell evokes outrage in me at the drop of a dime or knee, he played awesome
pronger was huge
leighton was ok and completely hung out in the wind to twist, he deserves to get the nod in game 2 and if he’s weak we turn to boosh like he was st jude
what happened to playing a great road game? dump, chase, grind, cycle, repeat
nodl in, parent out (???)
It's not easy to dump, chase grind
when the Hawks defense have above average speed and are skilled outlet passers
I don’t blame Leighton single-handidly for the loss, but as someone above said.. his positioning on a few of the goals was very shaky- I think he lost his confidence last night.
As for whether to go with him or Boucher… Boucher played well but even his goal to Kopecky was a result of putting himself in a bad position from which he could not recover.
In regards to defenseman.. I really see no point in dressing Parent if he’s going to play 40 seconds. Syrvet or Parent? Or can Nodl play D? Or can any of us on here play more than 40 seconds?
"I'd like to thank my hands for being so great." (Freddie Mitchell)
by PhillySportsDave on May 30, 2010 11:19 AM EDT reply actions
Did anyone else notice that on every score they were four (or five) Flyers around the puck/net but no one with enough sense to take out the man in front. I would not have blamed Leighton for a single one of those goals. The defense (sans Timmo and Pronger) was awful and the forwards were worse on their defensive assignments. My personal opinion is that they traded a generally disciplined game for a pretty crappy defensive game.
I think Leighton starts game 2. The general consensus among the Flyers announcers seemed to be that Laviolette took him out to shake things up…
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
I dont blame Leighton for the loss, but you cant say that all 5 (6 if you count Boosh’s goal too) were savable. He was slow moving around the crease, was misplaying the puck around the net, and had terrible rebound control. Still, I want him to start game two, but him and every defenseman not named Pronger need to step it up.
Pilgrim: Be gone pest, and give me the Bird
Yakko: We'd love to but the FOX censors wouldn't allow it
Not completely blaming Leighton....
BUT his positioning was absolutely atrocious. He was almost never square, he never challenged, and that breakaway shorty……eek. Wasn’t even a particularly tough shot…. but to hit the goal stick and find a hole (I still think it went 3 or 4 hole at 1 mph) is men’s league shit. Bottom line is he wasn’t deked, wasn’t opened up, and made contact with the puck. A pro stops that one.
His non-existent rebound control was particularly non-existent, due to puck not just going to Flyers by chance.
Defense let him down, yes. But, he looked like the AHL goalie everyone else is calling him in the league.
don’t you think it is good that we did lose…brings us back to earth and gives us motivation in the coming games to really play like a team that we know they can. It’s game 1 and I have told myself numerous times, the Hawks are going to win a few games. This isn’t a cake walk, this will be a fight and hopefully this loss will slap us back to reality and bring out our A+ game. This isn’t over, if we can win Game 2 that will give us a total boost going back home. I was a 1 goal game, we can hang…just need to tighten up on D and play like we have been all playoffs.
Flyers and Blue Jackets...nuff said.
At this stage, with these teams I would say no.
Both teams are going to make some big adjustments, if the Hawks are only slightly better, PHI can be looking at a 2-0, and needing to win 4 of 5. Both teams are to good to “spot” the other a game, and both have too much motivation to sit back to need that kick.
Regardless, with the way the game went, it was as much as a kick to the Hawks as it is to the Flyers, only the Hawks walked away with the “W” and PHI didn’t.
ART.I§8-11; AM I-XXVII
James Madison is my Hero!
by Toews-makes-funny-faces on May 30, 2010 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
granted there is motivation on both sides, but i only got to watch like the first ten minutes and I left to the movies. From what I read tho, it sounded like Philly played well but the mistakes is what cost us and kept Chicago in it. So I mean if that was the case, which it seems like it was, then Philly will come out more determined and focused not to let the Hawks have anything easy.
Flyers and Blue Jackets...nuff said.
by PhillyPhan85 on May 30, 2010 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Was I the only one...
That thought the goal Boosh let in was a complete and total joke? All he had to do was stick the pad out. It wasnt even a hard shot. Watching the replay, all I could think to myself was ‘WTF was that?’
by philiafan14364 on May 30, 2010 11:49 AM EDT reply actions
No i agree, it was absolutely terrible positioning. But he did make a few saves on chances that I think Leighton would have let in a sure one.
But even as bad as Boucher looked on the Kopecky one.. how did he get that chance? We fail to clear the puck even as Seabrook luckily keeps the puck in the zone.. and then no one is in the middle of the ice to break up the pass to Kopecky?
So again, defense can be blamed just as much, if not more, than the goalies IMO.
"I'd like to thank my hands for being so great." (Freddie Mitchell)
by PhillySportsDave on May 30, 2010 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
I thought it was really odd that he pulled his pad toward his body rather than extending it. Had he extended it he very well could have got some puck. That said, tough play to make that save no matter what you try.
www.mjt.org
“Had he extended it he very well could have got some puck”
EXACTLEY what I was thinking.
by philiafan14364 on May 30, 2010 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions
There wasn’t a single goal scored in spite of good defense. And every goal except for the 2nd (the breakaway that resulted from the shitty ice caused the puck to bounce over Coburn’s stick) was the result of screw-ups by more than one Flyer skater.
However, Leighton also played pretty poorly, and Boucher played a hell of a lot better.
As for your reasons for the goals, I disagree:
First Goal
Second Goal
Third Goal
Fourth Goal
Fifth Goal
Sixth Goal
by MarioD on May 30, 2010 12:00 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
on the 5th goal…. the question I beg to be answered is why is the off winger (JVR) rushing back into the play to cover a shooter on the right hash.
Probably because Asham is covering the wrong man.
And Leighton’s positioning is absolutely fucking horrible in that shot. Worse than horrible. He’s not square……just terrible.
I still hate the shorty… I hate it even more seeing that Leighton never moved out past the blue, thanks for ruining the rest of my day. :)
3rd goal
I think you illustrated the goals exceptionally well. I’d only differ with you on Leighton’s trapper positioning on the 3rd goal.
As you can see from this angle, Leighton’s glove is up high:
Unfortunately for Leighton, as Sharp releases the puck, he bets on Patrick trying to squeeze the puck below his glove hand:
He guessed wrong, but I’m not sure he played this incorrectly, nor was it his fault.
Of course he should be back out there in game 2.
But I was thinking after the fourth goal “if this were 4-0, he’d be pulled; I hope Lavvy is smart enough to realize that the offense scoring goals isn’t a reason to leave in a goalie who’s struggling.”
The problem with the “those were all tough saves” analysis is that you DO expect your goalie to occasionally bail you out with a tough save. So yeah, you don’t blame him for the breakaway or the one-timer or any other single play, but you do blame him for the collective performance, which just wasn’t very sharp.
This was interesting to read:
http://nhl.fanhouse.com/2010/05/29/niemi-the-winning-goalie-says-i-never-felt-good/
It’s odd not so much that he felt that way (that’s only logical), but the fact that he said it publicly. I’m sure Coach Q. will take him aside and ask him not to be so revelatory again.
Still, it would be nice to keep him uncomfortable. Let’s hope we can. :)
GO FLYERS!!!!
#1 Flyers fan in England (originally from Southeastern PA)
by Orange and Black Forever on May 30, 2010 1:39 PM EDT reply actions
I don't know if I would read too much into it
during the regular season he was never happy after any of his shutouts either. He would always say it was very close and he would not have been able to do any of it without the team. If this was his “shit the bed game” I would expect him to fix it by tomorrow. He doesn’t tend to dwell on the bad and is always quoted as saying he is just looking forward to the next puck and how he can stop it. I think both goalies had some serious nerves in game one.
I went to a fight the other night and a hockey game broke out.
- Rodney Dangerfield
I know I am in the minority here and don’t post often. But, Leighton did not play great but the goal Boucher allowed was the one that was unexcusable of all the goals. I realize most like Boucher more but I will be a mistake if Leighton is not back in the goal.
I also believe it was a mistake to pull him as both goalies were allowing goals and the other goalie did not get pulled. This is a BIG thing and being nervous is reasonable.
the goal Boucher allowed was the one that was unexcusable of all the goals
agreed ^. terrible positioning.. took himself out of the play.. if he would have hugged the post or even just made kopecky make the first move instead of coming out sideways, it would have been a much tougher goal than the piece of cake that resulted.
"I'd like to thank my hands for being so great." (Freddie Mitchell)
by PhillySportsDave on May 30, 2010 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
He also didn’t allow 4 on 9 shots either. Bottom line this was a bad game for our goaltending but overall the goaltending has been absolutely great in these playoffs, Leighton came in with a .948 save percentage or something and 3 shutouts thats just absolutely great for a guy nobody considered better then a career backup or an ahl starter until the flyers grabbed him again.
What Boucher did was the only play he had. He cut down the angle and forced the shooter to hold the puck, buying time for the defense to get to him. It was the smart play.
The problem was that no Flyer was evenly remotely in position enough to complete what Boucher set up.
Leighton let in 4 goals on 9 shots.
I damn sure can pin it on him.
by BroadStreetBully on May 30, 2010 5:27 PM EDT reply actions
Now just knock that sieve Niemi out
so we can see some REAL bad goaltending from Huet.
Just a chew toy for the hockey gods
While there were a lot of negatives in this game, there were a lot of good things as well. They proved Niemi like Halak can easily be beaten by the flyers style of play, Kane and Toews were both pointless and that ends Toews streak and a minus 3 and the flyers proved that the young defense of Chicago may not be as formidable as everybody is saying although its time to bench Parent and give Syvret a chance or even Bartulis. Man I hope Kevin Marshall makes this team next season. Another responsible defenseman to groom would be nice, Parent is running short on chances here, one more season in my opinion and if he doesn’t improve it’s time to trade him for what we can get.
Good or bad,
both teams can claim the following;
1. Our top line didn’t score a point
2. At least our secondary lines came through
3. Our goaltending and defense were bad
4. We got ripped off on that non-call
As a Hawks fan, I’m more or less okay with the Towes line not scoring. They never got on the ice for a power play and that’s obviously a big part of their offense.
Maybe, just once, someone will call me 'Sir' without adding, 'You're making a scene."
Leighton was fine
I thought he played great. He didn’t have much of a chance on any of the goals. The defense was out of position on the goals. Chicago was swarming, their speed caused all the misassignments by the D and the forwards helping out. Their guys need to be accounted for at all times and you CANT let them setup camp out front. Unacceptable Versteeg gets two cracks at that puck.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- How Mats Sundin’s no-trade clause controversy made fans reconsider loyalty in NHL
- Nordiques Nation invades Hockey Day in Canada
- Youth hockey coach, parents clash over alleged tirade over 9-year old’s 200th goal puck
- Friday’s Three Stars: Blackhawks lose seventh straight; Wings win nineteenth straight at home
- Puck Previews: Blackhawks reeling; Sabres streaking; Holmstrom’s 1000th game
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
