Post game analysis - Game 1, Ottawa @ Pittsburgh

CockRoche wrote:

wprager wrote:

N4L wrote:Ok, people crying about Elliott or saying he needs to be better should probably stop talking about goaltending (like they usually should) because he doesnt. He didnt give up a lead once, he made the saves he had to when it mattered, he shut the door.

Other than about 3-1/2 minutes into the game.

We cannot assume that Fleury will continue to give up goals he should be stopping (Neil) or that we will continue getting lucky bounces (Kelly -- and I'm pretty sure either Winch or Smith could have pout that one in).

Take away the bad bounce and that backhander could be the back breaker. The Sens forwards (with a little luck) save Elliott's bacon last night. If he returns the favour tomorrow then it's just the way it ought to be. I'm not putting ash on my head and ripping my shirt because Elliott let in a a bad goal or two, but I'm not going to sit there and say nothing matter except the W. I do not expect to win on Friday if we gives up another 4 goals on 21 shots; nor do I expect that he will do that. As someone already mentioned, this kid has a pretty good head; he rebounds well after so-so outings.

Great post.

Dash wrote:The only goal I call into question whether Elliott should have saved it was the Adams' backhander. Mind you, even the guys calling the game said that they are a tricky shot for goalies to handle.

Like I said, yes he won, the Sens won, but to keep it going he's going to have to tighten up a lot. It's okay when your team can score 5+ goals, but it is definitely a lot more important to not allow 4+ goals.

I'm still very confident with this team. I think it has a clot of character guys (so cliché), and the guys that have the experience where it is needed the most. For a young, and relatively inexperienced team, they played very well, and you have to give them a lot of credit for beating the reigning champions in their own arena.

I think we are going to see a different game and different series starting tomorrow night. If this series plays out like the first game, I would be worried about defence.

CockRoche wrote:100% agree.

I have tried to say the same thing and I did in the other Game 1 thread.

I have never once put down Elliott, he has a bright future and is mature beyond his years. My analysis of the goals against were meant to be from Elliott's perspective.

I have never been more confident in the Sens (and Elliott) then I am right now.

CockRoche wrote:

Dash wrote:The only goal I call into question whether Elliott should have saved it was the Adams' backhander. Mind you, even the guys calling the game said that they are a tricky shot for goalies to handle.

Like I said, yes he won, the Sens won, but to keep it going he's going to have to tighten up a lot. It's okay when your team can score 5+ goals, but it is definitely a lot more important to not allow 4+ goals.

I'm still very confident with this team. I think it has a clot of character guys (so cliché), and the guys that have the experience where it is needed the most. For a young, and relatively inexperienced team, they played very well, and you have to give them a lot of credit for beating the reigning champions in their own arena.

I think we are going to see a different game and different series starting tomorrow night. If this series plays out like the first game, I would be worried about defence.

100% agree.

I have tried to say the same thing and I did in the other Game 1 thread.

I have never once put down Elliott, he has a bright future and is mature beyond his years. My analysis of the goals against were meant to be from Elliott's perspective.

I have never been more confident in the Sens (and Elliott) then I am right now.

SpezDispenser wrote:

CockRoche wrote:100% agree.

I have tried to say the same thing and I did in the other Game 1 thread.

I have never once put down Elliott, he has a bright future and is mature beyond his years. My analysis of the goals against were meant to be from Elliott's perspective.

I have never been more confident in the Sens (and Elliott) then I am right now.

I don't see how anyone can argue with this. Elliott's our best goaltender in a long time, he'll be great. Last night he was not great, but good enough.

N4L wrote:
Ummm, no it wasnt because at no point did you even hint at the possibility of Malkin (a better play maker then scorer) making the pass over to Gonchar (who has a cannon) or anyone that was on the left on the 2nd goal.

The only goal that was iffy was Adams and Adams actually ever makes that shot again Ill be shocked.

wprager wrote:

CockRoche wrote:

wprager wrote:

N4L wrote:Ok, people crying about Elliott or saying he needs to be better should probably stop talking about goaltending (like they usually should) because he doesnt. He didnt give up a lead once, he made the saves he had to when it mattered, he shut the door.

Other than about 3-1/2 minutes into the game.

We cannot assume that Fleury will continue to give up goals he should be stopping (Neil) or that we will continue getting lucky bounces (Kelly -- and I'm pretty sure either Winch or Smith could have pout that one in).

Take away the bad bounce and that backhander could be the back breaker. The Sens forwards (with a little luck) save Elliott's bacon last night. If he returns the favour tomorrow then it's just the way it ought to be. I'm not putting ash on my head and ripping my shirt because Elliott let in a a bad goal or two, but I'm not going to sit there and say nothing matter except the W. I do not expect to win on Friday if we gives up another 4 goals on 21 shots; nor do I expect that he will do that. As someone already mentioned, this kid has a pretty good head; he rebounds well after so-so outings.

Great post.

To be fair, Neely said "never gave up the lead" and 0-0 is not a lead. I didn't catch that immediately.

N4L wrote:

CockRoche wrote:

N4L wrote:That 2nd goal Elliott let in went right off of Phillips, how he can prepare for a deflection of his D man's leg Ill never know. The goals that went in on Elliott last night were good goals, end of story.

Elliott getting a win in his first game is a pass.

How can he prepare for that deflection?

Be further out of his crease. By cahllenging a bit more, he cuts the angle down from the shot and the potential deflection, thereby allowing him to maybe get a bigger piece of the puck.

I agree that all the goals were good goals (except for Adams - bad angle by Elliott), but my conversation started by saying Elliott wants every goal back and the reasons why he wants them back.

I hope nobody thinks I am saying he should have stopped them as I am a big supporter of Elliott, but with that said, Elliott wants all those goals back in his mind.

That is all I was trying to say by breaking each goal down.

I hope this makes sense.

So, on the pk if he is out past the blue paint and Malkin makes the pass to the left he's totally out of the play and there is an open net. You realize there is more to goaltending then just challenginf the shooter right? I hope this makes sense.

N4L wrote:

wprager wrote:

N4L wrote:Ok, people crying about Elliott or saying he needs to be better should probably stop talking about goaltending (like they usually should) because he doesnt. He didnt give up a lead once, he made the saves he had to when it mattered, he shut the door.

Other than about 3-1/2 minutes into the game.

We cannot assume that Fleury will continue to give up goals he should be stopping (Neil) or that we will continue getting lucky bounces (Kelly -- and I'm pretty sure either Winch or Smith could have pout that one in).

Take away the bad bounce and that backhander could be the back breaker. The Sens forwards (with a little luck) save Elliott's bacon last night. If he returns the favour tomorrow then it's just the way it ought to be. I'm not putting ash on my head and ripping my shirt because Elliott let in a a bad goal or two, but I'm not going to sit there and say nothing matter except the W. I do not expect to win on Friday if we gives up another 4 goals on 21 shots; nor do I expect that he will do that. As someone already mentioned, this kid has a pretty good head; he rebounds well after so-so outings.

Really? Sens started the game with a 1-0 lead eh?

wprager wrote:
I'm sure he does.

On that particular play, it was a quick pass from Gonchar, who was smack dab in the middle of the blue line. Malkin one timed it so the only move Elliot had was to go to the post, not to come out and challenge. If he had come out (to challenge Gonchar) then the net would have been even more open. And there was absolutely no time to come out and challenge on the quick pass.

Now I *will* say this about that play. If he paid attention he would have known that Malkin was to his left with a lethal one-timer. And he would have also seen that Gonchar did not have a clear shot. Playing percentages just a little he could have been cheating just a little to Malkin's side.

But that's all part of the education, isn't it? Just think about it, a lot of the Sens got their first taste last night. They will get better.

SpezDispenser wrote:

wprager wrote:
I'm sure he does.

On that particular play, it was a quick pass from Gonchar, who was smack dab in the middle of the blue line. Malkin one timed it so the only move Elliot had was to go to the post, not to come out and challenge. If he had come out (to challenge Gonchar) then the net would have been even more open. And there was absolutely no time to come out and challenge on the quick pass.

Now I *will* say this about that play. If he paid attention he would have known that Malkin was to his left with a lethal one-timer. And he would have also seen that Gonchar did not have a clear shot. Playing percentages just a little he could have been cheating just a little to Malkin's side.

But that's all part of the education, isn't it? Just think about it, a lot of the Sens got their first taste last night. They will get better.

Gonchar's good enough to exploit that if you cheat even a little bit towards Malkin though, right? The dude's got a cannon and it's pretty accurate.

wprager wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

wprager wrote:
I'm sure he does.

On that particular play, it was a quick pass from Gonchar, who was smack dab in the middle of the blue line. Malkin one timed it so the only move Elliot had was to go to the post, not to come out and challenge. If he had come out (to challenge Gonchar) then the net would have been even more open. And there was absolutely no time to come out and challenge on the quick pass.

Now I *will* say this about that play. If he paid attention he would have known that Malkin was to his left with a lethal one-timer. And he would have also seen that Gonchar did not have a clear shot. Playing percentages just a little he could have been cheating just a little to Malkin's side.

But that's all part of the education, isn't it? Just think about it, a lot of the Sens got their first taste last night. They will get better.

Gonchar's good enough to exploit that if you cheat even a little bit towards Malkin though, right? The dude's got a cannon and it's pretty accurate.

He had no shooting lane, otherwise he would have shot it himself. Meh, sometimes you have to go with percentages but, frankly, I don't know those percentages. Plus, who was on the left side, probably Crosby? Crap, you just have to hope the guys in front can block the shot or deflect the pass, and the shooter doesn't make it perfect.

N4L wrote:Enter Cheechoo

N4L wrote:

wprager wrote:

N4L wrote:Ok, people crying about Elliott or saying he needs to be better should probably stop talking about goaltending (like they usually should) because he doesnt. He didnt give up a lead once, he made the saves he had to when it mattered, he shut the door.

Other than about 3-1/2 minutes into the game.

We cannot assume that Fleury will continue to give up goals he should be stopping (Neil) or that we will continue getting lucky bounces (Kelly -- and I'm pretty sure either Winch or Smith could have pout that one in).

Take away the bad bounce and that backhander could be the back breaker. The Sens forwards (with a little luck) save Elliott's bacon last night. If he returns the favour tomorrow then it's just the way it ought to be. I'm not putting ash on my head and ripping my shirt because Elliott let in a a bad goal or two, but I'm not going to sit there and say nothing matter except the W. I do not expect to win on Friday if we gives up another 4 goals on 21 shots; nor do I expect that he will do that. As someone already mentioned, this kid has a pretty good head; he rebounds well after so-so outings.

Really? Sens started the game with a 1-0 lead eh?