L-GDT April 30 Game 5 Nashville in Vancouver 7PM PST SPAC

[Strangelove]

Okay I'm fully invested again and ready to riot.

That's the spirit!!

[UWSaint]

* DJ81 was the goat. Like in the old sense of the word. He was terrible all night and took a stupid penalty to boot. His performance was very 2022-2023. When he is so obviously bad from the get go, would love to see him replaced on the line.

* Totally agree this game was more "regular season" inasmuch as the hitting was less (because through the Z goal, the Canucks had the puck a lot more) and was generally for this hockey game purpose (separate man from puck, interfere with play, try to gain possession) as opposed to "I'm gonna wear you down this is a psych op for the next week." This is the way playoff series' tend to go.

* PP was terrible -- started with not being able to win draws in the zone, but mostly bad entries. They were even getting into the zone briefly; they were losing the puck trying to set up the PP. I've said it before, I think coaches and analysts are wrong when they play the entry to set up the umbrella. Play the entry to get a quick strike -- make the opposition defend that possibility. Setting up the power play is what happens when the defense has a partial win (no quick strike) but don't disrupt possession. When you enter the zone to set things up as opposed to set things up after you've pushed them back, the opposition jumps the usual set up.

* Hronek hasn't been great, but my view on it is exactly the opposite what seems to be this board's opinion. We are seeing what we are missing when he's not on his game -- so is the solution to move on from him so that we can always miss what he brings when he's playing better -- i.e., return to the past couple of years? Stupid. And really, he hasn't been that bad -- his problem is that he's not doing all the good things he usually does. He's clearly squeezing the stick in the offensive zone -- shoot at the net, not at the guy you are trying to pass to. That goal the other night Evangelista scored was an unsuccessful attempt to deny entry, but there was nothing wrong with the read. He had EL23 as support backchecking, but EL23 blew a tire. Here's the most important thing -- if you don't pinch/stand up at blue line, you end up falling into collapse mode. It is too much collapse mode that has this team looking a little Greeney -- though last night they were better at making Nashville's entries tough. If you don't do it, you don't extend zone time; if you don't stand up at your line, you are conceding your zone too easily.

But Hronek's still been okay on retrievals, and the pinches are part of the game. Hronek's still better bet than everyone other than Hughes at moving from D to O and getting out of the zone. But he's been a bit diminished in this category, a bit less confident. You know, I like Z a lot, his rush last night was a lot of fun, his hits and attitude is awesome -- he plays ... conspicuously. But its the subtlety that drives Hronek's game, he goes tape to tape more than anyone who isn't Hughes, he rarely panics under pressure, he rarely takes himself out of a play. Soucy, Z, Myers -- they are all fine (Cole, well, only on the PK) -- but Z and Myers are much more hit and miss with defensive exits and the balance of patience/playmaking/skating/relieving pressure reads and Soucy is one dimensionally safety first in his own end. So much of (1) not getting stuck in your own zone and (2) creating offense from defense depends on precision that only Hughes and Hronek have the capacity to deliver regularly on this D core -- when Hronek's not delivering it, it's not good, but it is the most important thing that separated what the Canucks were capable of last year and what they are capable of this year (well, that and Boeser finding his game). The Canucks could use more from Hronek in this series, for sure, but it's not getting replaced by Z or Myers no matter how well they've been playing, and that's the reason much of the series has been played on heels and not toes.

* The drive to the net Josi made on the PP goal was brilliant. And the entry (or maybe 2) before that play, that play was there for the taking but not taken. Quick learner. Canucks had been cheating on PK entries and it caught up.

* TB53 needed not get plowed into Silovs there. Out muscled. If TB abandons or commits to interfering (instead of move for the puck and then late put-on-the-breaks), Silovs covers, and the goal doesn't happen or the play is more arguably goalie interference if the Nashville stick wedges under a goalie laying on a puck.

* I know it wasn't the Canucks/Preds, but how awful were the Bruins on that OT goal? Brutal. Greczlyk gets out muscled but is still contesting, giving Tavares limited options and two B's stand in the exact same spot puck watching? I mean one should be there to clock JT if he gets through, but the other has to be picking up guy in the slot. The pass was the most dangerous play there anyway...

[Topper]

UW - agree on Dakota. He was off as were most of the kids in the lineup. I was thinking as I watched last night that maybe the idea of an elimination game was in their heads. Did they think Nashville would roll over? Were the scared to make a mistake. They all appeared off.

Zed can say what he wants of the Joshua boarding but the hit came from the blind side. If it was a car he would have nailed the rear quarter panel.

[Picker of Cherries]

Neither of the third lines have done much. Wouldn’t mind seeing the Eliases switched for a game. See if Lindholm has more chemistry with Hog and Mikheyev, and see if Garland and Joshua could get Petey going.

[Ronning's Ghost]

I put some blame on the refs… not so much the calls made as compared to the calls not made..

If we score on PP it changes everything and we win

I seem to remember thinking that in a Canucks playoff series once before.

But it all seems like a dream, now...

[Raile]

* PP was terrible -- started with not being able to win draws in the zone, but mostly bad entries. They were even getting into the zone briefly; they were losing the puck trying to set up the PP. I've said it before, I think coaches and analysts are wrong when they play the entry to set up the umbrella. Play the entry to get a quick strike -- make the opposition defend that possibility. Setting up the power play is what happens when the defense has a partial win (no quick strike) but don't disrupt possession. When you enter the zone to set things up as opposed to set things up after you've pushed them back, the opposition jumps the usual set up.

If I'm not mistaken UW you pretty much describe what you want to see in a PP when you talk about Josi's PP goal later in your post? Rather than simply gain the line they give and go'd around our players at the line and he walked in uncontested.

As you said it was a beauty and I'd love to see more of that from our team not only to help with the zone entry but break up the often-too-predictable cycle around the perimeter.