Where to begin? How is it that a team missing five Defenseman played better than a team missing three? Tanev looked lost out there. I mean he wasn't exactly Mattias Ohlund of the early 2000s before hand, but giving up a breakaway to a guy playing in just his 28th NHL game was ridiculous. Then "playing the body" on Kostitsyn was bewildering. If you are going to hit someone HIT THEM, if not then play the puck. He looked like he decided halfway through to not hit but followed through anyway. I don't even want to go into that Gionta goal. All five Canucks were below the circle and the smallest guy, in traffic mind you they saw him, they knew he was there, scores on a rebound.
Then they have six powerplays and convert on two of them, which isn't terrible, but when you consider one they didn't capitalize on was a 5-on-3 that is unacceptable. This is the sixth seed in the East. You have the most points in the league. Not only do you have the same team you have had for awhile, you got two top Defenseman back. I am not trying to take anything away from Montreal. They came out firing on all cylinders, and the Canucks looked confused and unable to counter it. Why? I have no idea. But when something like this happens it is usually a coaching problem. The score does not tell the story here, Montreal dominated, and it could have been a lot worse, because they missed some chances down in the third.
No comments:
Post a Comment