Following a tough loss to the Sharks on Friday, the Canucks played this game like they had a lot to prove. After giving up 5 goals on their first five penalty kills in the series, they made sure to take five straight penalties just to prove that they could kill them. Having struggled on 5-on-3 powerplays all season and failing to score on two on Friday, they slyly goaded the Sharks into three such situations just to prove that they could take advantage of them. And finally, to avoid any accusations that they were only winning because the Sharks were choking in the third period, they wanted to prove that they could win a game despite being outscored in the final frame. I, too, had something to prove: could I watch this game? Yes. Yes, I could. It wasn’t that difficult. I’m not even sure why I questioned myself. I watched this game.
- Everyone seems to be a little bit confused and angry about the reffing in this series. One of the major issues is the inconsistency: it’s unclear what will and won’t be called. In one game, it will seem like anything goes. Holding, hooking, interfering? No problem. The next game it will seem like the strictest regular season game and lightly blowing on Kyle Wellwood is interpreted as cross-checking. I haven’t been this unsure about calls since I was peer pressured to prank call my high school crush.
- That said, while there were certainly some odd calls, weak calls, ticky-tack calls, and outright bad calls, that is not the story of the game. The story of the game is what each team did with those calls. On Friday, the Sharks scored 3 powerplay goals, while the Canucks squandered two 5-on-3 advantages in the second period. In this game, the Canucks killed off the first five powerplays of the game and were rebuffed every time. The Canucks received the next five, with enough overlap to create three 5-on-3 advantages and they scored on all three. That’s the story. No matter what the calls are, you play hockey with the game you have, not the one you might want or wish to have.
- Still, the officials were not at their best. They were so discombobulated that they tried to call a too-many-men penalty because they didn’t realize the Sharks had pulled their goalie. Yikes.
- The series of 5-on-3 powerplays for the Canucks in the second period was quite possibly the most bizarre sequence I have ever seen in a playoff game. A Torrey Mitchell hooking call less than a minute after a Dany Heatley high-stick led to the first 5-on-3. 11 seconds later, the puck was in the net. Before Mitchell’s hooking call expired, Henrik Sedin made a tape-to-tape pass to Logan Couture as he was coming off the bench, forcing a too-many-men call for the second 5-on-3. 16 seconds later, the Canucks had scored again. Just 6 seconds after the faceoff re-started play, with the bench minor still in effect, Douglas Murray cleared the puck over the glass for delay-of-game. You know at this point that the refs do not want to put the Canucks on yet another 5-on-3 powerplay, but delay-of-game is automatic. Also automatic at this point: the Canucks on a 5-on-3. 10 seconds into the 5-on-3, third goal into the net.
- With Ehrhoff and Rome out, Alain Vigneault surprisingly brought in Chris Tanev and Keith Ballard, leaving Andrew Alberts in the pressbox. I know, I’m shocked too. Not that Tanev was playing; I was shocked that Ballard was on the ice. Doesn’t Vigneault hate Ballard like Nene Leakes hates Star Jones?
- It’s pretty clear what Keith Ballard was doing while sitting in the press box: taking numbers. On Friday, Jamie McGinn injured two Canucks defensemen. Today, Ballard exacted some revenge with one of the most visually spectacular hipchecks you will ever see. McGinn was clearly looking to lay out Ballard with a big hit: shortly after, he was upside-down. I am in love with this hit. If I wasn’t already married, I would ask this hit to marry me. You know what, that hit is worthy breaking the law: it’s polygamy time. Hit, will you marry me?
- My wife just told me that she’s totally okay with that hit entering into an open relationship with us.
- With Ehrhoff out, Sami Salo stepped up into a much larger role, playing over 23 minutes and skating on the first powerplay unit. He thrived with the added responsibility, scoring 2 goals and an assist. Defensively, he blocked 5 shots while playing over 5 minutes shorthanded. He was playing like the weight of the world had just been lifted off his shoulders. Since the world didn’t end at 6:00 last night, I suspect it literally was. Clearly, the only reason the world didn’t end is because Salo saved it.
- Salo had 9 of his shots blocked on Friday. On the Canucks’ first 5-on-3, he smartly passed up a shot with too many bodies in front of the net, instead feeding Ryan Kesler for the one-timer. Kesler made no mistake, burying his first goal of the series top corner past Niemi’s blocker. It was tough for Salo to pass up the shot: he loves to shoot more than Roy Harper.
- Fortunately, Salo had more opportunities to shoot the puck. On the second 5-on-3, he drove a shot through Niemi with a massive slapshot. With his super-hearing, he heard a few people in the crowd speculate that it wouldn’t be possible for him to shoot it any harder than that. He took it as a challenge. On the third 5-on-3, Salo circled out past the blue line to get a good 35 foot run-up to his one-timer, ripping it five-hole on Niemi.
- On that last goal, take note of how much space Henrik has to get his pass through to Salo. With Marleau playing high to take away the shot from the point…he fails to take away the shot from the point. Well done, Patty.
- Only one person in the entire world would attempt to pass a puck through a goalie while on a 2-on-1. Henrik Sedin is that man. With the Sharks pushing hard to recover from a 3-0 deficit in the third period, Henrik and Burrows took advantage of an over-aggressive Douglas Murray to get a 2-on-1 break the other way. Dan Boyle defends the rush perfectly for a lesser man, but you can’t find a better man than Henrik. It’s an instant-classic bit of Wizardous Sedinerie from the Wizards of the Coast.
- The Sharks were arguably the better team tonight, dominating time in the offensive zone. Meanwhile, the Canucks played it safe. An indication of how safe they played: the Canucks managed only 13 shots on Antti Niemi. Only 7 of those shots were at even-strength. Meanwhile, they took only 1 shot per 5-on-3, but scored on each one. Germans wish they could be that efficient.
- Despite losing the faceoff battle, winning 45% of their draws, each of their 4 goals came shortly after a won faceoff. Maxim Lapierre was the only centre over 50% in the circle.
- The Canucks managed to set a number of franchise records in this game, as pointed out by Dan Murphy. Henrik set the record for most assists in a game and in a playoff series by recording an assist on all 4 Canucks goals. Salo had the two fastest goals by one player, the Canucks as a team had the 3 fastest goals, and with only 13 shots, they set the unenviable mark of fewest shots in a playoff game. I’m also fairly certain that no other team has scored three 5-on-3 goals in one playoff game, let alone one period. They were destroying records like it was Disco Demolition Night.
- Despite playing only 5 minutes tonight, Cody Hodgson had a big impact. His nifty pickpocketing of Heatley started the Sharks march to the penalty box as Heatley clipped him with a high-stick immediately after. The crazy domino tricks get all the glory, but the first domino is what gets everything started. Props to Hodgson.
- Raffi Torres lived up to his reputation as a human bowling ball, as he knocked over opponents and teammates alike at every opportunity. He got a bogus charging penalty for his beautiful destruction of Douglas Murray at the end of the first period, but didn’t make any changes to his style of play, knocking Joe Thornton out of the game in the third period with a shoulder-to-shoulder collision. Uh-oh, better get Maaco.
- The best post-game comment came courtesy of Alain Vigneault at the end of his time at the podium: No one’s going to ask about my goalie? Exactly. After game one, the first question Vigneault was asked was whether he was considering a goaltender change for game 4, a ludicrous question that earned a terse No from Vigneault. Then, after a solid 33-save performance, no one asked any questions about how essential his performance was to the Canucks winning this game, particularly early in the game as he helped the team kill off their early penalties.
- And finally, Neil Young may have season tickets to the Sharks, but he has roots in Winnipeg. He showed up in the crowd wearing a Manitoba Moose hat. Think he’s excited about the possibility of the Thrashers moving up north?
You might also like:
24 comments
Search
Recent Comments
- Chris the Curmudgeon
on I Watched This Playoff Game: Canucks at San Jose Sharks, May 7, 2013 - Lenny
on I Watched This Playoff Game: Canucks at San Jose Sharks, May 7, 2013 - Daniel Wagner
on Will Alain Vigneault lose his job if the Canucks lose again? (Yeah, probably) - TubaNat
on I Watched This Playoff Game: Canucks at San Jose Sharks, May 7, 2013 - Andrea
on Will Alain Vigneault lose his job if the Canucks lose again? (Yeah, probably)
About canada.com | Privacy Statement | Terms | Copyright & Permissions
© 2008 - 2011 Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved.
Unauthorized distribution, transmission or republication strictly prohibited.
Erik
May 23, 2011One of the most bizarre games of hockey that I’ve seen in a long time, but by the end, I loved it. It had all the thrills, chills, and spills that you could ask for.
After that hit, I’d totally get a Ballard jersey, and it would forever symbolise and encapsulate that moment.
As for Torres, how is it possible for an engine of such destruction to be so likable? Well, you probably have to be a Canucks fan to like him, but he he’s the pit bull that this team has long needed.
BECanucks
May 23, 2011Bizarre, bizarre, j’ai dit bizzard? Comme c’est étrange…
That was really a strange strange game… A zest of Kes, a lot of Finnish, plenty of Sweedes, and a french touch… we didn’t #WinDaTurd, even tough we #WonDaGame!
11 done, 5 to go.
annie
May 23, 2011Two things predicted this win:
1. That the video billboards kept displaying “MAXIM: Innovation Delivered” ads, just as a nice little encouragement to the fourth-liners;
2. That the dj kept playing “Immigrant Song.” Never play “Immigrant Song” to a Scandinavian. It encourages them, or it enrages them, but it always ends badly for you.
Poor Mason Raymond came out of this -2 and I didn’t even think he had a particularly bad game. He still has no trigger finger, but he was waving the gun around a bit anyway, especially in the first. (I am apparently the RayWatch now: stay tuned, I will keep you updated on my personal feelings about Mason Raymond!)
A nice thing about CoHo: look how he handled the puck on the hipcheck (The Hipcheck.) Oh, is awesome stuff happening? Sorry, didn’t notice, very busy with rubber disks. Calm. I love our rookies.
beninvictoria
May 23, 2011one could argue that the Ballard hit changed the momentum and allowed the Canucks to gain the upper hand. Personally I’d take Ballards one-per-game hipchecks over Rome’s bank it off the glass to centre ice every time but clearly Alain and I have different tastes
mongo
May 23, 2011neil young, the moose, iwtg and a canucks win.
4 of the best things in the world
Sach
May 23, 2011Bizarre really is the word for that game :/ Nucks still won though, and I gotta give credit to the coaching staff for having the guys practice 5-on-3s.
Anyways love your insight, and great write-up as usual
Chris
May 23, 2011Is it weird that I look forward to reading IWTG almost as much as the game itself?
Never cease to amuse me. Great work!
Wisp
May 23, 2011How lame of San Jose to boo the Canadian anthem. Did you see their website? “Who will score the game 5 game winner?” followed by a list of Shark players.
Knocking on wood, I hope those attitudes come back to bite them.
Chazz Ranger
May 23, 2011Great IWTG as usual. This game was indeed strange but beautiful. All 4 goals were sweet, good to see them get the 5-on-3 monkey off their backs and then curbstomp it. I’m sure before the game they were all like “Ok, what else can we slap the doubters in the face with? Oh, how about that 5-on-3 thing?”
AV’s comment at the end of the presser was so mint. He’s no Juice with the sweet quotes, but he gets in some great low-key tongue-in-cheek zingers.
Ballard’s hipchecks are always awesome, but this one was friggin’ glorious. I think he stencils a little bomb on his hip for every opponent he destroys with it. Please Coach V, play me more Ballard! Alas, somehow get the feeling when Ehrhoff returns, Ballard will be back in the pressbox.
The intensity level of the games this series gets ridiculous when the third line hops over the boards. It’s like someone throwing a pair of rabid wolves that can skate and a heat-seeking bowling ball onto the ice.
So proud to be a fan of this team! Get ‘er done on Tuesday boys!
peanutflower
May 23, 2011Brilliant as usual. I’m up just to read IWTG and it’s 2:32 a.m. It’s just as good as the game. That pass of Henrik’s to Couture was brilliant. What could Couture do? He’s hardwired to accept the pass. Incredibly weird stats from an incredibly weird game. I sure didn’t think the Canucks only got 13 shots on goal in the whole game. It felt like there were more shots. Ballard — classic. AV play me more! I make highlight reels fun!
C
May 23, 2011My favourite penalty of the night was Dan Hamhuis’s one-handed hook on Marleau and Marleau’s subsequent single axel.
peanutflower
May 23, 2011and the subsequent comment by Simpson or whoever about how strong a player Hamhuis must have been to do that one-handed. A sarcastic comment of course. I think.
gog
May 23, 2011Consideiring that people tend to treat the Sedins as one single entity, shouldn’t this be applied to all stats and not just +/-? Since in that case, Sedin scored 7 assists in one game which is an incredible feat. Sedins 34 points is also twice as many as the 2nd placed scorer. Needless to say, Sedin is dominating these play offs….
kim r
May 23, 2011Your wife rocks.
Daniel Wagner
May 24, 2011This is an accurate statement.
whisky jack
May 23, 2011Let’s see what I have got to say
about that game they played today:
’twas right away a power play
with a short-handed breakaway
Niemi stopping Mason Ray,
and then two calls I can’t explain –
Canucks were on the kill again,
and then two more put five on four
but bottom line they could not score.
The Sharks then forced the referees
to call a rash of five on threes.
The Canucks scored on each of these,
and when they made it four to none,
it was quite clear the game was won.
Then playing mostly five on five
the Sharks kept fading hopes alive:
by scoring two on Bobby Lou,
they showed the Nucks what they can do.
It was a strange unbalanced game
for which the refs must take some blame,
’cause most of us would make this claim:
that when it comes to playoff time,
to let things go is not a crime.
Today the players were confused
and I for one was not amused.
Of course I’m okay with the win,
but base my grin on bathtub gin.
whisky jack
cardinal sin
May 23, 2011I watched this game with all the flock,
And must conclude it was a crock:
The referees messed it right up
And cost the Sharks a Stanley Cup.
The little shove and minor hook
Were hardly worth a second look,
But then they had to make things right,
And gave the Nucks the game outright.
If they had let the players play,
The game had gone another way,
And while no knowing who’d have won,
I might now feel it fairly done.
As it was not, I’ve just to say
That San Jose was jobbed to today.
Cardinal Sin
Gabrielle
May 23, 2011Cardinal sin, actually the penalties were equal. Each team had 5 power play opportunities, it’s just a matter of making use of them. The Sharks had every opportunity to score early goals and they didn’t, Canucks get a few calls and the game is over. So it’s not entirely the refs’ fault.
cardinal sin
May 23, 2011But i’m a biased San Jose fan, and we lost. Also I felt the early calls on the Canucks were unjustified and led to the initial suspect call on the Sharks followed by four miscues that couldn’t be ignored and instant disaster. I don’t blame the referees “entirely”; however, they should have let them play instead of constantly blowing whistles as though it were a field hockey game.
J21
May 24, 2011Two of three 5-on-3 calls were objective penalties that they have no discretion in calling.
Mondo Bizarro
May 23, 2011cardinal sin – you’ve GOT to be joking? Not one of the Shark penalties was cheap! Even your coach couldn’t fault them! While I do agree the officials could have and probably should have put their whistles away, they could not ignore any of the Shark calls… the too many men, over the glass penalties are auto-freaking-matic, no judgement. The Heatley high stick is ALWAYS called… the hook for the first 5 on 3 was egregious and could not be ignored.
Yes the Sharks deserved all their calls.
For the Canucks – I’d say 2 were maybes, 2 were flat out CHEAP, and one was crazy. The Torres hit is NOT charging – the rule book clearly says 3 steps, and Torres took 1 and a half steps. It was a HARD, clean, to the chest TOTAL DESTRUCTION. Totally bogus.
Flat out, the Sharks LOST this game by being unable to score on their opportunities. 10 minutes of power play time in 24 minutes of game time, and a complete inability to do anything. The best scoring chance was for the Canucks. SHAME on the Sharks for such a brutal effort.
TheWellwoods
May 23, 2011“lightly blowing on Kyle Wellwood is interpreted as cross-checking”
That’s because destiny likes to intervene in all Wellwoodian affairs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3GcVa0UoJ0
Rituro
May 23, 2011Wait, Hasbro has a product called “Wizardous Sedenerie”? Where do I put my money? …oh, right, THOSE “wizards of the coast”. Carry on.
shoes
May 23, 2011The only reason that anyone is accepting any of the initial 5 penalties that were called on the Canucks is too not look like a whiner. Glass was given a 15 second lecture by the ref before the puck was dropped and the ref looked totally unhappy. 26 seconds later…..a phantom call…….and I think that set the tone for the refs until finally with the Canucks up 4-0, they decided they had ruined enough and just let them play.
But funny thing is…..it was almost identical to game 3 where the Canucks took the first 4 penalties and got scored on 3 times and then they got 2 five on threes and could not score.
And there wasn’t much whining out of anybody over the reffing in game 3…….but that can only be because of the result, because the reffing was similar enough to not be considered good in that game either.
What is going wrong and how is it best fixed?