With the Carolina Hurricanes playoff push ending at the hands of the same Boston Bruins both in 2019 and again in 2020, the potential is there to at least attempt to measure the team’s progress. An important disclaimer is the unique circumstances in 2020 with the four-month layoff, the bubble and everything else unique to 2020. While the two different years would never be directly comparable anyway, I do think comparing the two years has something to say about the progress of the Hurricanes from year to year.
What was the same?
A couple key factors were pretty similar between the two years. In both series, the Bruins’ best players played a huge role in deciding the series. In 2019, the Bruins top line of Patrice Bergeron, Brad Marchand and David Pastrnak combined for 6 goals and 14 scoring points. The 2020 series was similar with Boston’s big guns scoring 5 goals and collecting 14 points in 5 games. Also on the offensive side of the ledger, in 2019 the Bruins outscored the Hurricanes on the power play by a massive 7 to 1 mark in only 4 games. Though the margin was not as big, the Bruins 5 goals for versus 1 against on the power play was again a significant advantage for the Bruins. Both series also featured a catastrophic collapse to lose a game that seemed to be in hand. In 2019, the Hurricanes seemed to be on their way to pulling off a game 1 upset to get out to a series lead when they collapsed in the third period and lost. In 2020, game 4 was similarly crushing with the Hurricanes blowing a 2-0 lead entering the third period for a 4-3 loss. So in terms of what fueled the Bruins’ series wins, one could say that it was more of the same in 2020. The Hurricanes top players were outplayed by the Bruins, and special teams also played a huge role.
What was different?
Lasting only a game longer in 2020 and with a very similar set of drivers, one might guess that the series in total were similar, but there a few key differences. First, the Hurricanes did at least win a game this year. More significantly, whereas last year only two games were even close, in 2020 all five games were decided by a single goal not counting empty-netter. The goal differential (again not counting empty-netters) fell from 10 (15 to 5) in 2019 to a mere 3 (14 to 11) in 2020. The 4-1 series record does not accurately measure how close the Hurricanes really were. A couple bounces or plays here or there could easily have tipped the series in the Canes direction.
What say you Canes fans?
1) Did you view the 2020 match up against the Bruins as progress despite losing the series 4-1? Or did you think it was just more of the same year to year?
2) Discussing what I noted or also adding your own, what key improvements, if any, did you see going from the 2019 series to 2020?
3) On the negative side of the ledger, what problems did you see carry forward from 2019 to 2020?
Go Canes!
After the first 3-minutes of the 3rd period of Game 1, none of last season’s games we really close. Boston was the dominant team. This year every game was close and we should still be playing hockey given what happened in Game 4 and, even though no one really talked about it much, how unfairly Game 1 was officiated.
The team made progress but Boston was again unquestionably the better team this year. Their defense is excellent: they gave up basically no odd-man rushes, all our possession seemed to be on the perimeter, and their PK seemed just as likely to score as our PP.
Most noticeable to me was their edge. They were more physical and menacing and top-to-bottom stronger than we were (ie, Nordstrom really fits in well there; good for him). We could have benefited from someone standing up to some of their borderline-dirty play by fighting someone, probably McAvoy in Game 1 or 3, but it didn’t happen. Last year we showed this mind of grit against WAS but it didn’t make the trip inside the bubble this year.
We really missed Faulk’s edge and Edmondson’s absence hurt us even though Fleury took a big step. Someone is going to have to fill that role next season.
We took a step forward. Have a few more to go.
Agree on the physical edge. Missing Edmondson hurt a bit in that regard. He was playing well in general and is type to bring/stand up to nastiness. Svechnikov is another who plays with an edge, so losing him also hurt in that regard.
In today’s NHL, I do not think this is so much about adding that type of player but rather having that mentality.
Also agree with your conclusion that Canes took a step, even if just a small one, but still have a few to go.
Good observations.
Last year we had a lot of grit, not quite enough skill, now we have more skill but some of the grit is missing.
Also this year we played without our top D man and, for most of the series, without Svech, who has been one of the top scorers in the bubble. I think having those two guys on the ice would’ve been good for at least 2 or 3 less goals against and 1 or 2 more goals, which would’ve probably guaranteed at least game 6.
Boston were the better team, fact, but the officiating was just laughable, this seriously has to be looked into, because it added up to a tough sledding.
The special teams were the problem again, even if the Canes had more powreplays I’m not sure to what extent we could’ve used that as an advantage, we never fully cracked the Bruin PK, and that is something we have to continue to work on to be a top team.
Adding a bit more grit with skill on forward, sorting out the D (trying to offload under perfomring overpaid d and keeping the good bits) and the maturing of our role players, who are a young bunch, has the potential to make this into a truly top tier team. We’re not quite there yet, but see how far we’ve come from 2 years ago, it is exciting.
I already expressed my opinion on the officiating. We have improved and with our young team gaining experience, the future looks good. Too bad our best pure D was on the sidelines.
Our star players were outplayed by theirs but the gap is lessening. We seem to be our own worst enemy. Our goalies for the most part were good, but there is always those few mistakes which changes the game. Both did that. Letting a lead go, can’t do that. You can’t make those kind of mistakes against a very good team. 5 on 5 I felt we were right with them. The thing which has carried over was special teams not doing well.
Unfortunately our grit guys were out and that showed a little. Without the injuries I think we were at their level. Every team has to deal with that. I am optimistic about the future. Some bounces go the other way and the outcome could have been different. I think it was close. We got to them too. It was mistakes that made the difference but that is what a strong opponent can cause.
Oh, I think the Bruins will win it, or at least go up against Colorado, they are the cream of the crop right now, and we’re around 90% up there with them.
I love watching Colorado, but they haven’t been truly tested yet. Dallas will test them. They are big and tough and have enough skill to be dangerous. Vegas is also loaded and ready. The West is a gauntlet.
St. Louis is a great example of how a team can go down the tubes when they can’t trust their goalie.
Last year the Canes were tired and beat up. This year they weren’t much better. To win against good teams in the playoffs your best players have to be good. Outside of Svechnikov in game 2 the Canes best players weren’t good at all. Aho and Teravainen have to step it up to compete at this level. I was dismayed at how Aho would avoid puck battles in this series. You can’t compare yourself to the top players in the league playing like that.
The Canes definitely need more depth as well. The Bruins depth players like Krejci, DeBrusk, Kase and Coyle were far better than anything the Canes ran out there. The lack of edge also needs to be addressed.
Honestly, this series wasn’t close. The Canes probably won 3 periods out of 15. Yes, missing Pesce and later Svechnikov hurt, but they still have a ways to go to beat the Bruins.
lts—you hit on the key when you mentioned depth. At even strength, the top lines were close to a wash. The Canes lost the series at 2C. Krejci had 8 points. Trocheck had 2. While the sample is still pretty small, it is becoming more apparent that the Canes don’t have a second scoring line centered by Trocheck.
It would have been nice to see (and give some experience to) Geekie at 2C in one of the playoff games. While he didn’t record any points, it was frustrating to see his ice time reduced by 50%.
The acquisitions didn’t make the Canes better. Time to give Geekie, Bean, and some others an opportunity to see if they can help the team move to the next level.
Yes, Aho gets downright scared against the big bad “Bruins, he’s got to figur it out.
I’m not so worried about Svech, he’s still in the process, what a progress it was from last year.
The acquisitions did not deliver this time, Trocheck played at best like a questionable third line center, and we already have Jorddan Staal in that slot.
Geekie is working on his game, but being thrust into second line center role without a backup is probably not going to work for.
There are speculations that Adam Henrique could be available from the Ducks.
I would trade for him, even using the first round pick to do so. He would be an ideal second line center behind Aho and he can anchor a scoring line.
Henrique produces a little less than Trocheck and the same as Haula—one 50 point season in his career. The teams that have won the Cup have mostly done it with a 2C that they developed (or in Pittsburgh’s case were gifted). Krejci and Kuznetsov are perfect examples. Look at Tampa with Point and Cirelli (even Johnson). Acquiring centers in the market takes good teams (Ottawa and Nashville) and makes them struggle.
I don’t know if Geekie is the answer. Maybe it will be Suzuki in two years. Maybe the organization should have given Roy more ice time. What is fairly obvious is that acquiring (trade or UFA) a 2C is not often successful.
Good points.
Henrique’s underlying statistics are a little bit negatively skewed (because most of his scoring comes 5 v 5)
https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Michael-Pachla/Buffalos-No-2-center-quandary-choice-2–Adam-Henrique-ANA/209/107035
but nevertheless, he’s a relatively pricy player for the points, so maybe just sticking with Trocheck and hoping he can work it out is the best short-term strategy.
Yes, the Hala trade didn’t work out very well. I hope the one good thing coming out of the flat cap and likely cash crunch is a push to put more trust in developing players from within and giving them a full tryout chance.
Granted a good deal of the winning Checkers’ team disappeared into the iether once traded away but Roy is definitely one guy who really could become something, and I hope so for his sake, whereas Hala never really worked out after the first 10 games.