Senators can't convert powerplays, lose 4-1 to Canadiens
In another frustratingly effete effort, the Ottawa Senators made Jaroslav Halak look like an all-star and made their powerplay look like the feeblest in the league, walking out of the rink with a very disappointing 4-1 loss against the Montreal Canadiens. After the loss, Montreal pulled even with Ottawa in the standings, a very tough-to-swallow fact despite the fact that the Sens still have two games on hand. Most disappointing was the Senators impotent powerplay, which went 0-for-7 on the night despite 13 shots--which hearkens back to the criticisms of Bryan Murray earlier this week, when he said the Senators lack the grit to drive to the front of the net, force rebounds, and score some dirty goals.
Although there have been calls for Mike 'Not Martin' Brodeur to see some action one of these days, little blame can be placed at the feet of Brian Elliott for the loss. The first goal came after a linesman accidentally (or was it?) kicked the puck around Chris Phillips and right to Tomas Plekanec, leading to a two-on-one that Anton Volchenkov misplayed; Elliott was square to the shooter (Plekanec), while Volchenkov left Mike Cammalleri wide open to tap in the cross-ice pass. And the second was a doubly-tipped powerplay goal (which, apparently, are possible).
On to some finer points of the game...
Sens heroes: Mike Fisher-Milan Michalek-Daniel Alfredsson
The Senators' top line was dominant for much of the game. Fisher had the lone Senators goal early in the second period, and also had four hits and seven shots--second only to Alfredsson on the night, as the captain fired eight at Golden Jaro. Michalek had three shots, meaning that the three had 18 of Ottawa's 46 shots on the night. They also combined for four takeaways. Long story short, they brought it.
Sens zeroes: Alex Kovalev
Kovy did one good thing tonight: He injured Jaroslav Spacek with a shot late in the first period (Ed.: I'm joking, Kovalev didn't do anything good Tuesday night. And I hope Spacek is back in the lineup for next game, he's a well-respected person and a solid player). After that, he did little else: He floated either just inside the offensive or defensive ends, rarely venturing deep enough to contribute to the play, and didn't meaningfully contribute to the game in any way. Which you may say is characteristic of Kovalev, but most expected he'd at least bring some intensity to the team that let him walk for nothing. More unfortunate was that, since it was a one-goal game for most of the night, Kovalev could have made even just one play that would have had the chance to completely turn the tables, and he had plenty of powerplays to do it on. But he just didn't.
(Read plenty more... )
Sens killers: Jaroslav Halak, Sens' powerplay
Whether or not Halak was actually great isn't the point; he looked great. Look at the chart below (from CBSSports.com), which shows you where Ottawa had most of their shots from, and you'll notice one thing in particular: Little to no shots from the slot. The bulk of the shots are low-percentage ones from awkward angles at either side of the net. That has as much to do with the Senators' unwillingness or inability to get to that part of the ice and not have their shots blocked as it does the Canadiens' ability to clog up the area.
As for the Senators powerplay, it was just not pretty. I was actually surprised to see Ottawa had 13 shots on the powerplay, but they seemed unable to really get much going on it--unfortunate, because the PP had been clicking for quite a while leading up to this game. Ottawa was unable to get the puck off the perimeter and into the centre of the ice, where key scoring opportunities are truly generated. We complain about not getting powerplays some games, but when you can't score on them anyway, it's basically a moot point.
Credit goes to: Erik Karlsson, Chris Campoli
You've really got to handle it to Campoli after his scratching: He's taken it as a constructive criticism rather than a personal insult, and his play has improved as a result. And he's earned the trust of Cory Clouston, given 21:24 in ice time--the second-most on Ottawa after only Filip Kuba. You might think the PP opportunities had a lot to do with that, but more than 15 of those minutes were at even strength. He was -1 tonight, but he had a shot on net, three more fired toward the net, and looked like the player Murray was expecting when he traded a first-round draft pick for him last season.
Similarly, since being recalled from Binghamton, Karlsson has really looked strong. He had some strong poise in the first period, particularly of note being a confident play to use his glove to settle the puck and another to use his body to protect it--all in the defensive end. His confidence to play very high in the offensive zone can be nerve-wracking at times, but it hasn't yet cost him big time. But defensive play isn't what Ottawa needs from him, and that's not all he provided tonight: He had five shots on net, third best on the team, and played 21:12 on the night--fourth-highest on the team.
Big Hitter: Jesse Winchester
With Chris Neil and Shean Donovan out of the lineup, the supporting cast needs to step up and fill the void in the grit department. Although few seem willing to muck it up in front of the net, Winchester is stepping up his physical game. He had a team-high five hits in only 11:32 tonight, including a very impressive hit on Max Pacioretty behind the Canadiens' net. His line with Peter Regin and Chris Kelly was pretty strong in the first period, but didn't get a shot to generate momentum or dirty goals in the third--something Clouston might need to address, because I've noticed he's falling to the John Paddock-esque failing of consistently looking to the stars to provide all the offence, while making the players who are "on" to ride the pine.
Point: Blame the refs
The linesman gift-wrapped Montreal's first goal
Counterpoint: We can't blame the refs
The Senators had seven damn powerplays.
Endnote: It was definitely the kind of game the Senators need to shrug off, and they need to do so quickly; as bad as thePhiladelphia Flyers have been for the last couple months, they're still a good team. Ottawa can't play them lightly when they meet up on Thursday.
0 recs |
25 comments
|
Comments
Good recap
I’ve been following the site for a while and I think you guys do a great job. Keep it up!
I was at the game tonight and I agree, Kovalev was awful. Spezza didn’t have a great night, but I also hardly noticed him out there. I’d rather have a guy not stand out for playing mediocre hockey than stand out for playing like ass.
I thought Karlsson started out weak but really picked it up as the game went on, especially on the PP. Speaking of PP, going 0 for 7 is inexcusable. Murray was bang-on when he said we need to get dirty in front of the net. Halak was giving up huge rebounds all night and there was no one there to pot them in.
And I know this has come up before, but Clouston really has to deal with these bench minors. There’s no excuse for taking a bench minor with less than 3 minutes left in a one-goal game. I don’t care whose fault it was, as the coach, it’s his problem to deal with.
Oh, and did I mention that Kovalev was brutal. I can’t tell you how many times I yelled for him to move his damn feet only to have some smart-ass Habs fan laugh and remind me that he’s our problem now. So frustrating!
by Kevin_E on Dec 9, 2009 12:21 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I heard Kovalev get booed three times
That means he had the puck three times. In a game.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 9, 2009 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, and the funny thing was Sens fans didn’t counter the boos with cheers, like they would have for Alfie.
My hope is that Kovalev gets snubbed for the olympics (which he should, the way he’s played) and plays the second half of the season like he has something to prove.
by Kevin_E on Dec 9, 2009 8:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't believe I forgot about the too-many-men
So aggravating. It definitely has to be addressed. Especially for this curcumstance, where the Senators had already gained control of the play in the offensive zone—how do you get too many players on the ice at that point?
Also, thanks Kevin, and thanks for joining.
by PeterR on Dec 9, 2009 11:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t blame Clouston too much for not playing the Winchester line so much late in the game. They had some dominant shifts and were utterly pummeling Pyatt-Lapierre-Laraque… but it was the Habs’ fourth line, and Martin promptly benched Laraque and used Pyatt much more sparingly, denying Clouston the opportunity to exploit that matchup any further. The Winchester-Regin-Kelly line might not have done nearly so well against Plekanec’s or Gomez’s units.
by MathMan on Dec 9, 2009 12:59 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
That's a really good point
But I felt Winchester and company were playing well enough to at least warrant some shifts against the other lines — let them play until they show they can’t, right? We know what happens if we go down the road of leaning on a big line too much. If Ottawa is going to have any success, they have to be a four-line team. They don’t have the talent not to be.
by Mark Parisi on Dec 9, 2009 1:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Adn the key is that they do have the talent to be a four-line team
Ottawa’s got more questions about their top-six forwards than they do about their bottom six.
In the top, Kovalev and Spezza are underperforming, Fisher may fall back to Earth at some point, and the group is rounded out with one of Shannon, Foligno, or Cheechoo—all of whom are questionable as second-liners.
At the bottom, Ottawa’s got one of the most effective groups of third- and fourth-liners in the league. Winchester, Kelly, Ruutu, Regin, and whichever other two aren’t in the top six, plus Neil and Donovan when they’re healthy again.
To be successful, Ottawa’s top lines have to equal or slightly outplay their opponents, and the bottom six have to dominate their peers on the other team.
by PeterR on Dec 9, 2009 11:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Kuba
He was a sack of sh!t out there. Our powerplay suffered immensely because of his inability to set himself up in anything resembling a shooting lane and his piss poor play at the end gift-wrapped a goal for Gomez.
And anyone see Jason Spezza? I hear he shows up every 8 games or so with a goal. Sweet!
by Dr. Hansum B. Wunderful on Dec 9, 2009 1:56 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. He started off alright but really seemed to turn up the suck just as Karlsson turned up the good. That empty-netter was embarrassing.
by Kevin_E on Dec 9, 2009 8:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't see Kuba as too much of a disappointment...
He’s never really been much of a shooter, anyway, has he? The thing he does well is control the puck along the line, move it around cleanly, and set others up; that’s why he had so many (particularly secondary) assists last season. His inability to shoot effectively hurt our powerplay, but it was mostly shitty because the forwards weren’t getting in the right spots to take advantage of drives to the net.
by PeterR on Dec 9, 2009 11:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sportsmanship and goodwill
“Kovy did one good thing tonight: He injured Jaroslav Spacek with a shot late in the first period.”
Dude, you’re a bitter little loser.
P.S: I’m from Cornwall and am both a Sens and Habs fan, not that it matters here.
by true on Dec 9, 2009 3:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I love this site
And Iam a big Sens fan (from Montreal) But I have to agree with True, I don’t think its a good thing that a player was injured.
by FrankMontreal on Dec 9, 2009 8:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it was pretty obvious that it was a joke.
The best thing our player did was injure a guy? Doesn’t really testify to his tremendous playing ability…
Spacek will be fine. Good player too, but I’m super frustrated w/ our Sens right now. I’ve never seen a team that makes winning look so hard. Ah well…how’s the snow in Cornwall?
by oldmonk on Dec 9, 2009 9:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m assuming Peter was joking.
I, as his co-editor, do not agree with the sentiment, and it’s not typical of Peter. We’re usually pretty “anti-injury” here at Silver Seven.
Silver Seven: the Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators blogs.
by DarrenM on Dec 9, 2009 10:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am neither little nor bitter.
I will not speak to your third accusation.
But yeah, it was a joke, and I don’t like seeing players go down with injuries. And Spacek is a pretty stand-up guy, too, I sincerely hope he’s fine and doesn’t miss any more time. The comment was mostly an expression of my frustration with Kovalev.
by PeterR on Dec 9, 2009 11:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Kovalev
I get the joke. As for kovalev, he is an ultra disapointment. Do any of you guys think that his signing was the finla nail in the coffin for Heatley in the sense that once Kovy was signed, it basicall showed heatly that the Sens were definately moving on?
by FrankMontreal on Dec 9, 2009 12:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't have any doubt that was the case myself
Though, obviously, I have only an outsider’s knowledge.
I think Murray knew there was no way he could keep Heatley and that a trade was inevitable. Kovalev was insurance with Cammalleri and Gaborik being signed the same day as the Edmonton trade falling through. I doubt that Murray would have spent the money on Kovalev if we had gotten Penner and Cogliano back, but it’s hard to say that for sure considering the dearth of forward talent within the organization.
My gut says that Kovalev was identified as the best free agent forward remaining, and that Murray decided to roll the dice on him hoping he would at least put up half of Heatley’s points. It’s sure looking like he gambled wrong.
by Mark Parisi on Dec 9, 2009 12:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you’re right, and it was an aknowledgement of the fact that Heatley wasn’t coming back.
I honestly think that San Jose was on the table the entire time. Wilson didn’t mind if Murray looked around at other offers, because he knew Heatley was going to veto any move aside from one to San Jose. And that’s why Heatley refused the Edmonton deal, because he knew San Jose still had a good offer on the table and wasn’t going to take anything else. So all San Jose had to do was make their offer slightly better than the Senators would be with an unhappy Heatley, and that’s just what he did.
by PeterR on Dec 9, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can’t believe that strategy worked. Murray must have been desperate to take back Cheechoo’s salary and give up Heatley. I almost wish he would have stuck to his guns and held out for someone like Pavelski, regardless of what it did to the team this year.
by Mark Parisi on Dec 9, 2009 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m actually surprised that Melnyk didn’t toss out tampering charges against San Jose since Heatley was always insisting there were other options.
Not that he should have, or that they would have been successful, but it seemed like Heatley wanted Cali, knew Cali was an option, and waited for it to come to him, which is kind of the definition of tampering (if someone in the SJ org was the one who let him know, which is a big if).
Silver Seven: the Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators blogs.
by DarrenM on Dec 9, 2009 3:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Funny, I've thought the same thing
I’m thinking that is going to be the base of his grievance, personally.
by Mark Parisi on Dec 9, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

















