Game Analysis: Lightning At Hurricanes
The Carolina Hurricanes avenged their season-opening loss, dominating Tampa Bay en route to a 4-2 win at the RBC Center. Chad LaRose and Jeff Skinner each scored twice, but the news wasn't all good as the Canes lost Jussi Jokinen for about a month with an apparent leg or ankle injury.
The win moved Carolina to 5-4-3 on the season, placing them in a three-way tie for fifth in the Eastern Conference standings.
Three Observations
1. Getting two points, especially against a division foe, is great, but you have to think the Hurricanes would give them back if it meant they would have Jokinen for the month. Jokinen appeared to injure his left leg or knee when, off the faceoff, Joni Pitkanen shoved Ryan Shannon into the tangled up Jokinen and Dominic Moore. Shannon slid headfirst into the dueling centers, and Jokinen's leg bent awkwardly. Jokinen's absence will mean a chance for another player to make a case for themselves in the top nine. Either Skinner or Tuomo Ruutu will likely slide to center on that line, but any or all of Zach Boychuk, Drayson Bowman (recalled Wednesday), Anthony Stewart or Zac Dalpe (reassigned to Charlotte for conditioning, but could be back soon) will be expected to fill the void left by Jokinen's injury. A lot could depend on who moved to center: if it's Skinner, coach Paul Maurice might consider moving Alexei Ponikarovsky off the Brandon Sutter line and back into the top six, leaving a spot for one of the aforementioned players up on the third line. Moving Ruutu back to the middle would keep Skinner at left wing and mean perhaps one of the Charlotte contingent or Stewart could scoot up the pecking order.
2. LaRose silenced his critics Tuesday by scoring twice, including once on the power play. It was the third man-advantage goal of his career, the other two having come last season. That goal exhibited the work ethic LaRose brings every night — he simply outmuscled a much bigger Pavel Kubina to create traffic in front of Dwayne Roloson and eventually got to the loose puck behind the Tampa goalie to tie the score at 1. His second goal, off a feed from Jiri Tlusty, wasn't all that pretty either, but it got the job done. He double-hit the puck to squirt it through Roloson to put the game away. LaRose would probably be the first to admit he doesn't have first-line talent, but right now he is making up for it with determination and smarts.
3. It's a strange thing to notice, but Tampa Bay is seemingly one of the more conniving teams in the faceoff circle. From wingers jumping to the circle before the draw to pre-faceoff stick slashing, the Lightning seem to do anything and everything to gain an edge. They have a couple players that are historically good in the circle — Moore and Adam Hall are closer to 60 percent than 50 so far this season — but Steven Stamkos has been poor throughout his career while Vincent Lecavalier is simply average. The Bolts did win the draw duel Tuesday, 33-27, but the thing that stood out the most was how they toe the line of faceoff etiquette.
Number To Know
3 — Games in a row with a point for Tlusty, matching the longest such streak of his career. Tlusty had assists on Jan. 10, 12 and 14 of 2010 for his other three-game point streak. He now has points in all three games since being moved to Carolina's top line and has 10 shots in during the run. The 10 shots in three games also matches a career best, and he's done it while averaging just less than 14:30 a night in those games.
Plus
Jeff Skinner — On any other night, this honor would belong to LaRose, but Skinner's two dazzling goals are impossible to ignore. On the first he was within a stick's length of four Tampa defenders but found a way to waeve his way to Roloson's doorstep for a goal. Then the eventual game-winner came courtesy a beautiful multi-pass exchange with Jokinen that left the Lightning shaking their head. Defensemen Victor Hedman and Eric Brewer likely had nightmares about Skinner last night.
Minus
Brandon Sutter — Like the Chicago game, it's again difficult to find a goat in such a great team effort. It's especially tough to pin it on Sutter, who was pivotal in Carolina killing off two full minutes of 5-on-3 time and also played a central role in stifling Lecavalier's lien for most of the night. So this minus goes to Sutter just for his work in the faceoff circle. Sutter won just three of 17 draws on the night and was victimized mostly by Lecavalier, who went 13 of 17 on the night. On the whole, Sutter has been vastly better on draws this season, sitting at 50 percent on the year despite the 18 percent effort Tuesday, but it was a tough night in the circle for No. 16.
36 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Wow!
Chris Stewart or Zac Dalpe (reassigned to Charlotte for conditioning, but could be back soon) will be expected to fill the void left by Jokinen’s injury.
Chris Stewart is going to fill in for Jussi? ;-)
And that's another Hurricane's goal! WOOOOOOOO!
Not at center … but there’s an opening in the top six and who knows if he’ll get a look. None of them do what Jokinen does, but each brings there own advantages.
by Cory Lavalette on Nov 2, 2011 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, Chris Stewart won’t get a look unless the Canes make a trade. Anthony Stewart, however, is a candidate for top-six time. ;)
(I’ve changed the article to reflect which Stewart is on the roster.)
by Brian LeBlanc on Nov 2, 2011 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
LaRose silenced his critics Tuesday by scoring twice, including once on the power play. It was the third man-advantage goal of his career, the other two having come last season.
OK….Let me clarify my position then. I am not a critic of LaRose. I feel he is a good guy, good energy player, 100% effort gut. Perfect 3.5 liner (4th liner can play on third without hurting you). BUT even with his two goals, he is not a top six forward, and really doesn’t belong on the PP. His skill level in shooting the puck or passing the puck is still modest at best, and really ranks lower than that.
You do know what you are getting with LaRose, but even with is two points, he failed to convert other beautiful feeds that an average top six forward in the league would have made a goalie make difficult saves on. He doesn’t see the ice and therefore pass well, and therefore doesn’t contribute as an assist guy.
Rosie will get his goals. He always has. It’s hard to deny someone who works hard and puts forth the effort and is willing to go to the net. But even with all his top line time, he’s scoring like (at a rate and shooting percentage) he does on the 4th line or the 3rd line(at a rate and shooting percentage). Not like a top six forward. While helping the team, he’s really not helping the first line. He got a boon last night, twice. He was given other boons, but couldn’t turn them into points.
+1
Well said. It’s tough, because as much as I love LaRose and what he brings to the team, there just seems to be so much wasted potential on the first line and PP. Some of the criticisms that LaRose gets are unjust, because even Staal (whom we all think is a first line talent) will miss and waste opportunities, but LaRose is clearly not a great finisher.
That being said, what LaRose brings to the team is invaluable both on ice and in the locker room. He’s every bit as important for the team as Staal and the other first liners. There is a place for Rosie on every NHL team, it’s just not on the 1st line.
I agree with ya Squeaky. Those two goals should not change anyones idea of where he should be playing. They do show what Chadd is very good at, energy,position on the ice and a willingness to get dirty. Full marks to Chadd last night, he maximized what he can do well. But the top line just needs more skill than he has.
I don’t disagree either … but hard to argue it today.
by Cory Lavalette on Nov 2, 2011 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Well said.
Fact is, the first goal was a pure effort goal and the second goal was scored because he whiffed on the shot. He missed quite a few chances in front of the net where he could have made the goalie make a beautiful save, but instead, he shot them into his chest or wide. He had a clear 2-on-1 that was misplayed by the defenseman, yet he decided to shoot it into Roloson’s chest instead of passing it to the proven goal scorer.
The guy isn’t talented enough for the 1st line and he shouldn’t be there at all. His performance in this game doesn’t prove otherwise for me; in fact, it proves that he isn’t talented in my eyes.
While he's been slotted on the "first line..."
It’s kind of unfair to pretend he’s been a 20-minute-a-night player or anything close to it. He’s averaging a whopping three seconds more per night than he did last year, yet he’s nearly doubled his scoring in points per game (.38 to .67.) Call it fluky, call him underwhelming all you want, but the fact is he’s on pace for a 50-point season. That’s hardly shabby out of a guy with “bottom-six” talent.
Personal attacks are the weapon of the ignorant.
Panthers '011: This is what we've been waiting for...we get to overpay the core of a 2-14 team!
by MichaelProcton on Nov 2, 2011 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Um prior to last game and all…Given the small sample size, his two points really upped that number. Do even you think he’s really going to finish with 50 points even if left where he is???
So if we take every player's best games away from them...
Won’t all of them look pretty bad?
Personal attacks are the weapon of the ignorant.
Panthers '011: This is what we've been waiting for...we get to overpay the core of a 2-14 team!
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2011 10:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Again, not the point, and no one said anything about removing the best games. You commented on LaRose doubling his production from last year. My point is it’s a small sample size. Statistically, comparing an entire year 82 game season, to a sample size almost a 10th of the same season isn’t truly valid until your sample is bigger. My point that one game, adding two goals, totally changes any current statistics in huge way.
Therefore, if you want to compare, you’d have to make the assumption, and extrapolate out to how Rosie would do for the entire season—hence my asking if you thought he would finish with a 50 point season. If you are unwilling to look at it that way, then you must acknowledge and recognize what that stats were just one game prior to the last one…or roughly .54 points per game, or a 44 point season. Still better than last year, but not as good as the stats after one game where he exceeded his average ppg by 200%, adjusting the statistics more heavily due to limited sample size.
So, that last game, as I mentioned really upped that number…. Because even at his previous pace, it’d be his best year ever. So I doubt he continues at his .67 ppg pace.
Hey Cory
Just wanted to say that I’ve very much enjoyed your game analyses so far this season. I especially like the number to know and plus/minus sections. Is that something you came up with for this season or were you doing it last year? Anywho, just thought you should know. Keep up the great work.
It’s new this year … last year I just did 5 Obs. … instead we have the three now, plus the new ones. So a bonus for everyone. Thanks for the kind words.
by Cory Lavalette on Nov 2, 2011 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Great analysis, as always
Thanks Cory.
Do you have a preference for how the lines get reshuffled with Jussi out? Where will the playmaking come from on the top two lines?
It depends who plays center. I’d put Ruutu there, personally, and scoot Boychuk to that line to start. But I have the feeling Skinner will get the nod and that Poni will move up to the left on that line. We’ll know more tomorrow.
by Cory Lavalette on Nov 2, 2011 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s the way I’d like to see it go as well. Boychuk’s had some very nice games and it would be great to reward him, but I too have the feeling Skinner will get the nod and Poni gets moved up. Still worry about Skinner on the defensive side of things, but all he does is exceed expectations by leaps and bounds, so I won’t be shocked if he proves able to handle that responsibility.
When my opinions and reality don't coincide I re-evaluate my opinions, not reality.
Still worry about Skinner on the defensive side of things
Wow CL, we actually agree on something; I posted a similar comment on another thread. Next thing you know; pigs will be flying, sh*t will roll uphill, and Chad LaRose will score 2 goals in 1 game.
Some managers manage using the carrot, Mo manages by using "The Stick."
I don’t worry about Skinner’s defense as much as I worry that he is our only real scoring threat at the moment and he should therefore be focused mostly on putting pucks in the net.
by JussiJuice on Nov 2, 2011 3:54 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
In all seriousness
Boychuk has done everything I was asking dalpe to do to get more playing time. He understands the system, he makes smart plays, he still gets in his chances, and, most importantly, you notice him when he’s out on the ice. The sample size is limited, but he’s done it and now there is an opportunity. I would understand if poni goes to the second line and boychuk goes to the suttee line, but I’m pretty comfortable with keeping the third line as is and giving boychuk a shot in the top 6.
When my opinions and reality don't coincide I re-evaluate my opinions, not reality.
I agree with giving Boychuk a look at left wing on that line. Why move Poni up when he is playing well with Sutter and Dwyer. They shut down Tampa’s top line all night and will need to do the same with the Caps. Bad strategy to mess with your number one defensive forward line when you are home, have last line change and can dictate the line matchups.
They only other god option I see is to slide Ruutu to center and move Stewart to that line.
Sadly that still leaves us with LaRose with Staal. His 1st goal was all hustle and battle… good for him. Second goal was all Tlusty and Chad got lucky since he half wiffed on the shot. But more telling was a wiff on a perfect set up from Staal. And when he was driving to the net and Staal got by his check and was driving to the far post, Chad lobbed the puck into Roloson’s chest. Worst place to shoot on that play…. textbook is to fire it hard along the ice, far post…. tough save for the goalie and usually kicks back out and Staal would have had a great chance. Tough to run a quarter horse with thoroughbreds. And I love quarter horses but wouldn’t enter one in the Derby.
by sittler27 on Nov 2, 2011 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Speaking of our Plus player up there, Jeff Skinner will be on NHL Live (NHL Network and streamable on NHL.com at 5:55pm ET today.
Twitter @HMof2
by Carolyn Christians on Nov 2, 2011 2:12 PM EDT reply actions
Thanks Cory
and i have to admit for the upteenth time..fans of and in the Caniac Nation are some of the brightests and most knowledgable fans in the easten conference .and this fan is grateful for all of things we all freely share with one another as we do…
9/11/01 - Never Forget !!
Long Live #63 The Condor
Go Canes & Checkers !!!
Cory I gotta disagree on the minus. If that is your criteria you gotta hng the goat anchor n Staal. Sutter is almost 2% better in FO circle than Staal on the year has the same amount of points and is getting about 2 minutes less ice time. Staal contributed a penalty (was a weird double call with LaRose) and not much else. Sutter was a beast on that penalty kill. I’d give up FO wins for that kind of penalty kill on 5-3 anyday. Sutter is a plus 1 and Staal is a minus 12.
Impotent coach can’t motivate the uber hgh dollar player and he isn’t stepping up. I agree with both sides about LaRose. His skills are imited, he plays with everything he’s got. He is also on the stat sheet anyway, 3rd on the team in points, far and above Staal at 8th.
It looks to be more than one vacant center spot open in my book.
I know Eric is a better player than this. Don’t know what’s up, but if Cam played like this he wouldn’t even have to dress out. Staal should be held to the highest standards. Something is wrong and it needs to be fixed. Give him a week in Bora Bora or a press box. Carrot or stick I don’t care, ut he has to, MUST produce on the ice and off. That’s why he gets paid huge bucks.
MINUS- Staal
A
Getting old sucks!
Paladin,
I know you have to get your Staal jabs in, but this was the Tampa Game Analysis. Sutter got the minus because of a poor, poor faceoff performance compared to Staal over 50%. And Sutter was a -1 or -2 last night compared to Staal’s +1. Sutter did do an excellent job on the 5-on-3 PK. This is not talking about the season as a whole, just last night. Sutter has outplayed Staal so far this season, just maybe not last night.
Some managers manage using the carrot, Mo manages by using "The Stick."
by PackPride17 on Nov 2, 2011 5:33 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
It’s related to the game, not to the season on the whole. Staal was 11 of 19. As for Staal’s season … I touched on this a couple games back: his October’s have been terrible for four straight years, avg. six points. That’s in the books … now let’s see what November brings.
by Cory Lavalette on Nov 3, 2011 8:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Cory I missed your previous article sorry, I love your research and stats.
Pack, I know I hit nerves, partly why I do it. My generalization was maybe Sutter was too bloody busy doing what Staal gets paid for to concentrate on FO’s.
I am also partial to the kids. I feel/felt Sutters contributions were superior to Staals simply taking in air an a penalty. I was far more polite than usual???Bright side?
A
Getting old sucks!
I’m not understanding this statement:
My generalization was maybe Sutter was too bloody busy doing what Staal gets paid for to concentrate on FO’s.
What was Sutter doing that Staal should have been doing? Don’t get me wrong, I think Sutter has had a fine year so far and Staal is struggling; but of the main stats those 2 are very similar expect for the +/-.
Staal did commit a penalty, but he also had a lot of scoring chances and won the majority of his faceoffs. I even believe he won 3 straight in our own zone with a couple of minutes left, when Tampa was making their last push. People complained about him not doing that before, so wouldn’t that be a key contribution?
I just felt that you were hating for the sake of hating. I’m know that’s what you do, but I thought I would respond to the criticism.
Some managers manage using the carrot, Mo manages by using "The Stick."

by 
























