I guess you could say the atmosphere at the United Center on
Wednesday was....electric?
Sorry. It seems I am slowly morphing into a blogger or
someone that creates headlines on NHL.com. But all weather puns aside I think
Game 1 was quite the treat for hockey fans all around. Especially in a season
where the conferences did not intermingle I would say we are seeing the best of
both worlds come together. Yes, the Blackhawks have a reputation for their
speed, offensive zone cycle, and depth. And sure, the Bruins are known to play
bruising and physical, push aggressively on the forecheck, and start and finish
plays from the point. But it goes without saying that neither team has seen
each other's particular breed prior to Game 1.
Our Conference Final bow-outs were phenomenal preppers to
this series when you look at it. Pittsburgh has all the world class talent you
could ask for on a single roster, especially up front, and are tough to match up
against. Los Angeles is stifling defensively and rely on keeping the puck out
of the net to win games. But the Penguins and the Kings are nothing more than
lessons to be learned heading into the Final, especially with the respective 4
and 5 game series that led us to this point.
Ok, so with the background out of the way, let's talk about
the most recent edition of hockey. As far as the lack of face-to-face
interaction is considered I felt that Game 1 went as expected. Chicago came out
with the intent of making a statement, Marian Hossa even made I believe 8 hits
in the first period alone. Andrew Shaw seemed to be on assignment to piss Zdeno
Chara off beyond belief, and the home team energized the crowd by tying things
up in the 3rd and sobered the crowd by finally putting the game to bed in the
3rd frame of overtime.
Boston, as far as being the away team goes, came out and
played their game. Even with putting up a goal per regulation period it seemed
like the Bruins were coasting in the early stages, just feeling out how the
Blackhawks would react to them. They were unlucky as far as the tying and
winning goals are concerned but they seemed to play with less urgency. And with
a Stanley Cup on the line I find that terrifying if I am a Blackhawks fan.
This game for the Hawks was dictated by emotion and that did
see them through, but they had to come back from a 2-goal deficit to make this
victory possible. We saw with Pittsburgh that if a skill team meets a physical
team at the latter's level, well, it doesn't really work out. And unless Johnny
Oduya and Andrew Ference have something worked out I wouldn't count on too many
positional lapses going forward. But coming back to the "terrifying"
aspect, let me just offer you this sentence: The Boston Bruins went up by 2 goals
twice with little investment in the game. They basically appeared to be seeing
how the Blackhawks would approach them and let the goaltending speak for
itself. All bad bounces aside I feel like the Bruins have the tools to make
this result not happen again.
For Game 2, the Blackhawks need to maintain their speed on
the breakout, keep getting bodies to shift in front of Rask, and manage their
physicality. Joel Quenneville has the advantage on Claude Julien in respect to the
ability to shuffle lines despite two too many men on the ice bench minors. It
has been said throughout the entire playoffs but the top line guys need to
start making offense happen. Chicago has been gifted with strong depth players
but a team such as Boston, with their backline support, can adjust to limiting
those chances. And to top off that point, the double deflections will not be
the saving grace in every game. They have been effective at catching Tuukka
Rask off guard so keep generating those looks but do not rely on them to win
you games, activate the skill portion of your game and stymie a goaltender at
the top of their game.
On the Bruins side, play tighter in your own zone, let your
pesky physical side out, and utilize the forecheck to produce more turnovers.
Game 3 between Chicago and Los Angeles, Chicago's one loss in the WCF, brought
out one major aspect in Chicago's style of play. The Blackhawks rely greatly on
cross-ice passing to transition through the neutral zone. Despite the Kings'
lack of offense, their 2-1-2 forecheck and their decision to let the play come
to them proved to be effective in limiting the Blackhawks' chances setting up
offense.
The Bruins are now acquainted to the Blackhawks' systems but
one thing I think could have altered the outcome of Game 1 was the Bruins
allowed the Blackhawks too much time setting up their breakout and, as a
result, scrambled in the neutral zone. Boston should manage their line changes
better and their aggressive but patient play will pay off. Finally, Corey
Crawford is playing extremely well but is not an elite goaltender at this point
in his career, and we saw a couple gaffes that could have ended the game for
Chicago two nights ago. Crawford is smart in positioning and makes good saves,
but he lets easy ones in and is not known for making great saves on a regular
basis. He has improved in his rebound control but it is the times he does not
that provide great opportunities to capitalize.
So what are your thoughts on keys to Game 2?
No comments:
Post a Comment