Showing posts with label Success. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Success. Show all posts

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Meet The Bruins: Key Pillars

Go to Tobalev's Habs Preview.

So important are the playoffs that they warrant a special look at the special players on the other team for once. Of course, we'll still look at the Canadiens in depth, but this post should give people watching some idea of those guys on the ice that we suddenly finding ourselves hating with raging enthusiasm.

No, not the refs...

The Boston Bruins.


To begin, I thought I'd remind everyone of a few key thoughts:

1) The Bruins were better against all other opposition than we were this year

2) How is that possible?

3) Does it matter?


My blogging colleague explained to us why he thought the Bruins managed so many points without any one person that could be marked out. Russ from the Bruins Report (a great Bruins blog) – check it out if you have the time – said:

The Bruins were good against the rest of the East because they have, for the most part, played a solid, simple defensive scheme in their own zone that allowed them to minimize scoring chances down low, and kept the majority of the shots to the perimeter. Tim Thomas was more effective playing behind this style of defense, and allowed him to modify his "crazy flailing everywhere like Hasek only not as good"
style.


So, I thought I'd have a peek behind the curtains and introduce everyone to those I see as important to this scheme and the Bruins success:

The last line – Tim Thomas

Drafted by the Quebec Nordiques in 1994, if nothing else, Tim Thomas has outlasted his fellow Quebec goalie draftees Thibault, Fiset and Tugnutt. His career, however, has taken a very different path to those once Quebec starters – taking him to a professional career in Europe and back to North America. Since his reclamation from the Finnish leagues, he has had quite substantial success with the Bruins.

This season has been no exception – Thomas has posted great numbers with the Black and Gold. Following the regular season, he ranked 4th in the entire league in save percentage with a gaudy .921 rate, with a respectable 2.44 GAA and 3 shutouts. In fact, he was having a Vezina trophy season until about the end of November where he underwent a temporary meltdown. When I defined an excellent game as one with a Save% of 0.920 or more, then I was fairly surprised to see that Thomas has 37 excellent games this year (out of 57 GP). In a way this runs contrary to the story on him that he runs hot and cold. For most of this season anyway, he has been running hot.

This statement does of course need to be qualified. He has been anything but hot against the Canadiens. He has been mediocre by his own high standards, and uncharacteristically has cost his team on one or two occasions:


In particular, early goals, which threw his team into their old habits against Montreal were his and Boston's undoing on a couple of occasions.

In any case, though he may not be favoured around the league's pundits, Tim Thomas is a top goaltender, a starter through and through. However, like Carey Price, Tim is an NHL playoff rookie, so won't bring years of NHL experience to the table. He does bring some from other competitions, much like his counterpart.


If a goalie's duel develops, Boston will be in good hands. I think that's the first thing on Boston's wish list and the last thing the Canadiens would want.


The Game Maker – Zdeno Chara

Chara comes advertised as the leader of this Bruins team. He wears that C on his chest and has allegedly been key in a lot of their success this season. In fact, if you asked a Canadiens fan who typified the Bruins we have seen this season, then many I'm sure would also say Chara. He has been sub-par on many occasions against the Habs, and downright comical on others. In any case, the thing to remember here is:

As Chara goes, so do the Bruins.

To give some idea, recently Chara missed 5 games when the Bruins were sitting pretty for the playoffs. His absence coincided with 4 losses (2 in OT) and one one close win (OT). All were against teams the Bruins had previously handled quite well. He was missed to say the least. had his absence been longer, the Bruins would be done and dusted and we'd be playing the Hurricanes. Phew for that one...

Statistically, he has also had quite a successful season. 17 goals and 34 assists for a defenseman is strong. His 17 goals put him 2nd in the league among Dmen. His 51 points rank 10th in the league. He has had 20 outstanding games (which I defined as games with either 2 points or with a +2 rating). In those games, Boston got points in 18. One was against the Habs, so blame the ghosts (like Sinden), not Chara.

But it's never really been the statistics with Chara has it? When he played with Ottawa (after he learned to skate), he was Montreal's worst nightmare. Whenever we played Ottawa, we could only realistically hope for about 10minutes in their zone – most of it when Chara was off the ice – because the big man and Redden were so effective at smothering the forwards. Something changed though – the rules. Now, Buffalo can exploit him, Carolina can and as we've seen, so can the Habs.

Chara is still an outstanding defenseman with an amazing shot, but he has been disarmed of one of his main weapons since the lockout – holding. Despite this he can still be excellent if teams choose to play a throwback style of hockey where screening and wrestling are preferred to passing and skating. Just another reason the Habs need to set the agenda for this series.


The Game Breaker – Marc Savard

Quite a tag for little Marc Savard from Ottawa. Not so little if you believe Yahoo, who call him 199 lbs or something. Other sites weighed him without his soaking wet equipment on and have him at a stocky 190ish.

He is the Game Breaker on the Bruins because if the Bruins need a goal they don't have too many other places to look. they will certainly look to Marc first (assuming he even plays).

Savard's NHL career has taken many twists and turns following a revelation or two in junior. Drafted and let go by New York, then tried but released in Calgary, finally success but disinterest from Atlanta, he has now landed in Boston with a huge raise.

Strange that his employers always seem to let him go without much of a fight. Even Calgary, who needed a passer of his pedigree and learned the small-man lesson the hard way with Martin St. Louis. The truth behind these occurrences probably lies somewhere between defensive disaster and costly for what you get. If rumours are to be believed, Marc has turned around his defensive game at the behest of Claude Julien, and now provides value for money on the Bruins.

Maybe not so surprising when you consider none of his teams have ever made the playoffs until this one. In fact, should he play, this will be Marc Savard's first ever playoff game at the tender age of 30.

In looking at his game log, I looked for multiple point games. You figure, top scorer, lots of multiple point games. Well, let's say Marc likes to be more consistent. He did have a respectable 19 multiple point games. 14 were Bruins wins, they got points in 16. Strikingly, only 3 were games where he managed more than 2 points. However, when you think about it, this probably says more about the Bruins than it does about the man.

One thing you could never deny about Marc is his ability to pass the puck. It goes back to WJC in 1993 even. People who watch him on a regular basis talk about his passes finding players who still thought they were fighting to get away from coverage. His mind thinks ahead of defenders, his stick can carry out his wishes (though apparently his wishes do not include shooting very often). This what people said about all the great passers. What's more, this season Marc ended up 3rd in the NHL for assists, just behind Joe Thornton and Datsyuk. Last season, third behind Thornton and Crosby. The man keeps good company. certainly a player to keep an eye on. besides, passes like the ones described are a thing of beauty no matter whose shoving the disc.

We have been hearing that Marc Savard will be available to play. However, if he doesn't it will be a gaping hole for the Bruins. To look beyond Marc Savard for a Game Breaker is hard work with Bergeron and Kobasew out. The obvious candidate will be Marco Sturm, whose more beneficiary than benefactor when it comes to making plays.


The Great Hope – Phil Kessel

The final man in the Bruins equation for me is Phil Kessel.

Less production in his draft year, he eventually slipped to 5th overall behind some serious prospects. If anyone remembers the year before that though, Phil Kessel was the American Sydney Crosby. In fact, in 2005, he was putting up more than a goal and 2 points per game in the US National development program. In other words, the boy has pedigree and the boy has skill.


What must not be forgotten is that he is still a young man. 20 to be exact. But for me, in his first NHL playoff series, he will be key to the Bruins chances.

For one thing, as we've mentioned, the Bruins don't have a wealth of scoring options, especially if you factor in the injured players. For a second thing, Phil Kessel is probably the best natural goalscorer among them anyway, any day.

A coach who knew his back was up against it – vs. the team that had defeated his rather unimaginative strategy 8 times in a row – might choose to put a wildcard like Kessel in a key role. Say, with a passer who could thread passes that other people wouldn't have thought of. Claude Julien is not this coach. At least he has not shown a willingness to be him yet – even with his team in dire straits following Chara's injury. In the last meaningful game, Kessel played with Schaefer and Sobotka. He managed to score anyway. in the last game against Montreal, more third line action with Krejci and Lucic, all while Kobasew gets to play with Marc Savard.

We have been lucky to see our young players come through this year in Montreal. it has been a huge factor in our success. If Boston are to succeed, I feel the same will be a requirement for them, with Kessel success leading the way. If he is let off his leash, Montreal should have someone new to concern themselves with.

Go to Tobalev's Habs Preview.

Welcome Opponent One: The Boston Bruins

The Bruins hardly need much introduction. After all, we have all seen them 8 times since October, 10 times since September if you're keen. They lost to us in Montreal. they lost to us in Boston. They even lost to us in Halifax.

Strange thing though. Since the Habs beat these opponents 8/8 times (or 10/10 if you prefer) it doesn't feel like we know the Bruins the way we should. At least not the bruins the rest of the league knows.

We've heard ad nauseum (from myself included) that if the Habs had lost to the Bruins just 4 times, the Bruins (45-25-11: 101 points) would be ahead of the Canadiens (43-29-10: 96 points).

We know the world doesn't work this way: eliminating the team you play worst against would make a similarly enchanting story for most of the teams in the league. Even so, the fact that the Bruins cultivated more points against the rest of the league than the Habs is a matter of some intrigue.

For me the first question that cam to mind was: "Well, who did they beat?"

The answer: Everyone at least a little bit.

vs. Southeast (10-9-1: 21 pts)
Wins: Atlanta (3), Carolina (1), Florida, Tampa and Washington (2 each)

vs. Northeast – sans Montreal (13-6-5: 31 points)
Wins: Toronto (5), Buffalo and Ottawa (4 each)

vs. Atlantic (12-4-4: 28 pts)
Wins: Philadelphia, Islanders and Rangers (3 each), Pittsburgh (2), New Jersey (1)

vs. West (6-3-1: 13 pts)
Wins: Chicago, Columbus, Nashville, LA, Phoenix, San Jose


Basically, the Bruins were steady as we thought. They never slipped too far down the standings, even despite a brutal December. They picked up a lovely 12 bonus points for losing to the Canadiens 10. But while the Habs gave up on this habit of slipping in for points somewhere around the illustrious Xmas road trip, the Bruins have used it as a tried and tested method for point collection.

Interestingly for a team that gets to OT so frequently, they have not seemed to learn how to win from it: going 8-12 in 60+ minute games this season.


If you take the wins another way and examine which teams the Bruins like and dislike, you can see certain patterns emerging:

1) The teams they lost to most frequently are faster than they are: Montreal, Carolina, Buffalo, New Jersey and Pittsburgh

2) With the exception of New Jersey, all the teams above like to win by scoring – the Bruins don't seem to enjoy that

3) Many of the teams they were most successful had trouble scoring in general as well: New York Rangers, New York Islanders, Atlanta, Toronto

4) They poached bad goaltending: Atlanta, Philadelphia, Toronto and Ottawa after their crisis mode

NOTE: The Bruins were also involved in 3 (count 'em, 3) scoreless draws, twice with the Rangers alone. These guaranteed point (and fan-pleasing) affairs got them 4 points and a good-looking record against the Rangers.


From all these results you begin to get a picture of how the Bruins win and lose. If a team skates at them, passes around them and generally tries to play normal hockey, the opponents have a good chance of winning. If a team gets into a jousting match with them, the Bruins hold more cards.


As a final enquiry, I contacted someone who knows a heck of a lot more about the Bruins than me – Russ from the Bruins Report (a great Bruins blog) – check it out if you have the time. I asked:

How were the Bruins so good against the rest of the teams in the East?

And, as if to corroborate what all the circumstantial evidence says, he replied:

The Bruins were good against the rest of the East because they have, for the most part, played a solid, simple defensive scheme in their own zone that allowed them to minimize scoring chances down low, and kept the majority of the shots to the perimeter. Tim Thomas was more effective playing behind this style of defense, and allowed him to modify his "crazy flailing everywhere like Hasek only not as good"
style.


He went on to qualify:

The Canadiens, however, have proven that the Bruins have a hard time defending against a team that uses their speed to quickly get into the Bruins' zone, and not allow them to set up in their "Box Plus 1" formation. Montreal was very good all season long at both getting into the offensive zone, as well as forcing the Bruins to take multiple penalties trying to neutralize their speed. As evidence, the Canadiens on the PP had a 30% success rate against the Bruins' 28th ranked penalty kill.

So, combine strong team speed with a solid powerplay, and you see where the Canadiens were able to beat the Bruins this season. It remains to be seen if the Bruins can 1) find a way to clog up the neutral zone enough, and forecheck strong enough, to stop the Canadiens breakout, and 2) stay out of the box. If they *can*, it'll be a decent series.


Hence the Canadiens need to stick to the gameplan. Adjust for Anaheim, maybe. Not for these guys...


By the way, stay tuned to Lions in Winter for a couple more primers on this series. I (Topham) handle the key Bruins players to watch for the series and beyond and Tobalev chimes in with his expert views on the critical players from the Habs.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Experts Share More Wisdom

We all know how the experts told us the Habs would do this season. Even the most generous among them was only willing to give in to battling for 8th – which, incidentally, is the biggest cop out of all time if you are making predictions.

Today, I came across this lovely article
, in which revered Habs expert Pat Hickey tells us, in his expert analysis, why the Habs are better this season.

If I can recapitulate his answer for the Habs for you, it would be: "Well, everything."

Here are his 10, without the explanation:

1. Kovalev
2. Gainey
3. Experience
4. Depth
5. Health
6. Play on the road
7. PP
8. Top 3 defensemen
9. The kids (those 25 or younger)
10. The coach

So, let me get this straight, we have the coach, the GM, Kovalev, all players under 25, the top 3 defensemen, the PP, depth and experience.

What's left Pat? Oh, a few people I suppose: Pierre Boivin, forwards over 25, Bouillon and Brisebois. Not much.

I'm glad he left out his prediction for the playoffs which would probably be about as committal as the Habs winning between 0 and 4 rounds, with a max of 16 wins.

Excuse my bitterness, but I do get tired of reading articles that promise to explain something and instead just list everything under the sun. I do agree with all his points, but abhor the catch-alls like youth, experience and depth that allow him to defer any decisions on completing the list.

I'm sure Pat Hickey has ideas for why the Habs have succeeded that pinpoint things a little better. I'll court controversy a little bit closer and try to give some specific reasons for the improved points haul this year.

1. Alex Kovalev – like Pat, I'll put him first. I don't believe his play on the ice has improved as markedly as some of you, but I have noted that his attitude following games has turned around completely. From finger-pointer to mature leader, that was a very important change for this team.

2. Andrei Markov – I'll be as bold as to put him on his own. If we were talking about defense alone, it might be apt to group him with Komisarek and Hamrlik, but Markov makes that PP go, so he deserves recognition all his own.

3. The promotion of Sergei Kostitsynas I wrote yesterday, that move marked a philosophical shift and also unlocked Andrei for some reason.

4. Man rotation – players have been rotated in and out of the lineup as it suits the team, and not merely for punishment or reward. If playing a game where some muscle is needed, Kostopoulos will dress, if not he may sit. The system, which perplexed experts when Begin was benched after a good effort in October has paid dividends as players learned that they could be benched without taking it as an affront (like Rivet) and get some deserved rest.

5. Souray out – Souray was the man on the camera, the man taking the shots, the man we called the real leader. In hindsight, it looks like he was taking up too much space for a player of his (limited) ability. If nothing else, Kovalev has been uncuffed on the PP, allowed to do something more than passing to 44.

6. Cristobal Huet – forgotten. Huet gave us January. Have a look. January is the difference between 1st and 8th. January is also an important month for momentum and positioning coming into that useless trade deadline. It's a shame Pat Hickey decided to omit Huet, a real shame. To say the Canadiens have improved because he left is over the top – ask Washington.

7. The schedule – it hasn't been that it was lopsided or anything, but it seemed every time we got on a bit of a skid, we could look up and see Boston or Philadelphia waiting. We are built to dismantle ineffective defenses like those and those games seemed to relaunch us every time. In addition, having the western road trip at then end of the schedule meant the Canadiens would be more focused (even in California) and any losses would not (and did not) derail the whole campaign. You might remember that last year, not only did the team get flu, but the schedule at that time was absolutely packed. When most players were ailing there were 3 games in 4 nights. Given one point was the difference, you can see how scheduling can be a help over 7 months of hockey.

8. Mark Streit – he has at times erased question marks at forward and defense. Without him, the depth would not look so good. Carbonneau must surely appreciate having a PP ace who can play any position on the ice.

9. Saku Koivu – usually not one to be confronted with an underrated tag when it comes to Montrealers, he has quietly done a great job this year. Even with his usual wingers demoted when struggling, he found ways to get the replacements scoring, whether it was Sergei, Guillaume, Mark or even Mathieu. I also hold that he was big in the bigger games this year, and that his knack for an extra gear will continue to bee a key for our success.

10. Claude Julien and the Boston Bruins – their inability to adapt to a team they played 8 times until the final minutes of the series was ineptitude of the highest degree.