Sorry for the extended yammering. After MONTHS with no hockey, I have a lot to say. 🙂 Feel free to stop reading at the point when you’ve had enough.
Leaving behind what I have called a ‘fan generation’ (maybe I’ll write what I mean by that on a slow day in the future) of losing behind requires change. At a simple level, the change is math like winning more games, collecting more points in the standings and finishing somewhere in the top eight teams in the Eastern Conference to make a return to the playoffs. But in sports where culture is important and expectations and habits can create repeating results regardless of changes in personnel or talent level, the biggest change that shifts a losing team to the winning column is a change in attitude and expectations. In terms of the simple math, Saturday’s season-opening win netted two points which is at least one more point than any other season since 2012-13. But more significantly, Saturday has the potential to become a small building block for making the bigger change in attitude and expectations. For the first time in a long while, the Hurricanes will not exit their first game and enter the practice that follows saying ‘it’s only one game; let’s win the next one’ or similar cliches uttered by losing teams early in the season that very often continue down the same path and become losing teams at the end of the season.
I will leave the detailed recap to the many other outlets that post AP style recaps with who scored when and also a couple quotes. I always recommend the version on the team website that also has links handy to all of the statistics too.
Before jumping straight to notes, I would summarize Saturday’s 5-4 shootout win by saying that the game was strong in terms of puck possession and winning the shot and scoring chance battle but was an intermittent train wreck in terms of attention to detail and the big ‘oopses’ that have plagued the team in the past especially early in the season. Sebastian Aho took over the game and could have collected more than the two assists that he did (see bel0w). Jaccob Slavin was his usual solid self defensively before chipping in a shootout game-winner to boot. The volume of mistakes on the back end looked much more like a potentially good young blue line still fighting through growing pains on the path to realizing its potential.
Player and other notes
I noted four players for whom I was looking for a continuation from 2016-17, so let me start with them in the order from the preview.
Noah Hanifin
He had a huge goal. He had another really good chance where he smartly stepped into an opening to receive a pass and a good soring chance. And he was generally strong and mostly error free with the puck on his stick exiting the defensive zone and traversing the neutral zone with the puck. But to go with that positive, he was an utter train wreck defensively in the neutral zone and in his own end in terms of sorting out angles, positioning and assignments. The first Minnesota Wild goal came on a power play when Hanifin was in the penalty box after having a Wild player easily blow right around him to the net and earn a Hanifin obstruction-type penalty in the process. The second goal saw Hanifin get too far up in the neutral zone and simultaneously loose track of the angle on the player and passing lane he needed to defend on the rush. The result was an uncontested breakaway that found the net behind Scott Darling. And the third Wild goal came when both Hanifin and Trevor van Riemsdyk had trouble getting the puck through the neutral zone and both pushed too far forward and found themselves on the wrong side of the puck in transition. The result was another breakaway and a goal against. He had a couple other near misses
The half full for Saturday is that he played well in two areas of the game. The downside is that he was an utter mess defensively which is table stakes for being solid top 4 defenseman in the NHL.
I might write more about this in the coming days, but there are two angles on this. First is to recognize that perhaps Saturday will prove to be an anomaly and not a reason for concern. Second, if the trend continues, is to choose the harder path forward. Even after a tough night defensively like Saturday, I continue to think that the path forward for Hanifin that comes closest to reaching his ceiling MUST include a style of play that is aggressive. That being the case, going into a shell and reverting to passive and conservative might make for a better next game, but it will not get Hanifin to where he needs ultimately to be as a player. It might be time to swallow hard and embrace the growing pains that could be a difficult necessity. Regardless, after Hanifin’s night and day game offensively versus defensively on Saturday, one can bet that he will make my ‘what I’m watching’ for Tuesday.
Elias Lindholm
Most notable in Elias Lindholm’s game was his secondary but significant role in Sebastian Aho’s huge night. Lindholm showed heady chemistry with Aho. Multiple times they supported each other with the puck providing short passing outlets or driving defensemen back to make some space before Aho eventually used the situation for his wizardry. I would not say that Lindholm stood out tremendously in terms of the engagement level that I look for from him, but by no means did he have an invisible night in that regard.
Justin Faulk
When the Hurricanes’ defense seemed to be coming unglued in the first period, Justin Faulk was mostly quiet in a good way. He did pick up a tripping penalty in the first period but otherwise seemed to at least stay out of trouble alongside Jaccob Slavin. His jump through the neutral zone playing offense with or without the puck continues to be a strength. He had multiple times on Saturday where he stepped into good places to shoot but had a few passes that were just a bit off and did not yield a shot. When Coach Bill Peters quickly regrouped after the tough period for the defense and reunited Slavin and Pesce for the second period, Faulk seemed to be okay next to Hanifin too. All in all, I would call Saturday a net positive for Faulk which is significant given that he has historically been a slow starter.
Scott Darling
I am mostly inclined to give him an N/A due to the tough night. First, somewhat like both of his preseason starts, he had almost nothing to do early to get into the game and build a rhythm. Then when the shots came, a few were some combination of ‘no chance’ or ‘really really tough’ (the uncontested breakaways). So his four goals against on a modest shot total are nothing to write home about, but I would not say that they are so much indicative of his level of play. I would not consider three shots enough to make some kind of final evaluation of his shootout play, but 3-for-3 was encouraging and even more so when considering how he did it. First, being big is a huge advantage for the shootout. There is simply less net to shoot at, but maybe more significant is the fact that when he goes down to take away lower portions of the net along the ice, the targets to shoot at in the upper corners are still fairly small. Finally, he demonstrated the patience to just wait out the shooter especially in the case of Koivu whose move was from the ‘make a dozen quick moves to see if you can get the goalie to play first’ variety. Darling patiently just waited Koivu out until all he could do was shoot the puck into him from too close to have much chance to beat him. In total, I am chalking Saturday up as a positive for Darling with a win and a perfect shootout performance and am hoping he fares better when the team gives him a more manageable game.
Other player notes
Brett Pesce
I already singled out Noah Hanifin for a rough first period. While Hanifin might have struggled the most, his partner Brett Pesce had an uncharacteristically rough start as well. The ominously foreboding start featured the play where Hanifin carried the puck around the net only to run into Pesce and get the puck tangled up with the his stick that he was in the process of retrieving. The Hanifin/Pesce duo in the first period had a run of four or five shifts that alternated between two versions of bad. The first featured Pesce having the puck on his stick on the wall in the corner but unable to move it from his own end such that they were hemmed in and had to win the puck multiple times to ultimately clear it to center ice. The second version featured Hanifin’s run of defensive breakdowns in the neutral and defensive zones. Peters saw enough of the combination after 20 minutes and reunited Slavin/Pesce to start the second period though everything later went random when Trevor van Riemsdyk was felled by injury making for a defense corps of five. Pesce was also beaten off the wall to the backdoor for an easy Wild tap in on the power play on Hanfin’s penalty.
Sebastian Aho
He collected two assists and earned the first star for his efforts, but he could have had much more. The positive of playing with Staal and Lindholm is that he brings a bit more offense to that checking-first line while still being capable defensively too. The downside is that with neither Staal or Lindholm being pure finishers, Aho’s playmaking/passing ability will be underutilized to the tune of 12-18 assists playing with them. The wild card in the equation is if Lindholm still has another gear left offensively as he is still a young player. Aho fed Staal for two point blank chances in the first part of the game and Lindholm for two pretty good chances off the rush later with none of those passes finding the back of the net. I guess the positive are twofold. If the Hurricanes win and make the playoffs, who cares about point totals. And the other silver lining is that Aho’s next contract likely to be signed next summer could be significantly different if his point total is tamped down to a 55-60 point range instead of pushing up to the 70s neighborhood.
But back to Saturday, I already noted that I thought Aho and Lindholm’s chemistry moving the puck was tremendous. And I think Noah Hanifin’s goal is the epitome of Aho’s cerebral hockey play. He had the puck on his stick in the neutral zone in a crowded situation, with Minnesota defenders back in position roughly where they would have liked to be and with a 3-on-3-ish situation that looked pretty harmless. From starting with the puck on his stick on the left side of the neutral zone, he correctly figured out that there was a bit more room to the right, so he cut across, forced the defense to start adjusting and gained the blue line on-sides with time and space that did not seem to be there on the other side. But still looking at 3-on-3 and crowded without much to do, he made a short pass to Lindholm who was able to join the play when Aho played across the front of the blue line. But Lindholm really did not have much for room either and seemed destined to chuck the puck to the end boards and then go try to win it. But Aho trailed Lindholm supporting the puck and giving him a short and safe pass to use. Then when Aho received the puck, he used the space behind Lindholm created when Lindholm drove the defense back. Suddenly, Aho had the puck again with time, space and speed on the right side of the ice. And based on how we got here, it was not just random luck that he quickly found Noah Hanifin jumping into the play and put the puck in his wheelhouse for a shot and a goal. I will bet my opening night Canes hat, that Aho knew Hanifin was coming into that lane from taking a quick look during the brief time that he did not have puck.
Shorter version: One needs to unravel the sequence of small and seemingly simple plays that add up to the big one to see it, but Aho’s cerebral playmaking continues to be off the charts.
The fourth line
I am historically not as high on Brock McGinn as some others, and I am on record as preferring to start Josh Jooris in McGinn’s slot for opening day. McGinn had a tremendous game. He had a couple decent hits and was right in the middle of the fray for the huge Joakim Nordstrom goal that kept the Canes in it early. And McGinn also had multiple plays where he used some combination of will, effort and smarts to make small plays to push pucks forward either out of the defensive zone to relieve trouble or through the neutral zone and into the offensive zone to get a line change. Nordstrom and Kruger also had strong games, and anytime you get a meaningful goal from the fourth line it is a bonus.
Jaccob Slavin
At the early point when the blue line was an intermittent dumpster fire, Slavin was a steady presence mostly just clicking off shifts without incident. I am not a fan of the shootout, but at the end of the day, the skills competition matters immensely in the standings, so Slavin’s patented forward-backhand-top shelf finish was the clincher for an extra point in the standings. His highlight was easily on the Rask goal. Well before Aho’s wizardry, Slavin won a puck in the defensive zone and then exhibited sheer strength and skating ability to do a tight turn and accelerate away with Eric Staal draped on him such that he was able to make a quick pass to the neutral zone to get the rush going. On a night that was a mixed bag defensively, calling Jaccob Slavin simply ‘steady’ is a huge compliment.
Janne Kuokkanen
I liked his game in general despite the fact that he did not light up the score sheet. Interesting will be finding where he fits as a player who has a playmaking center ‘play with the puck on his stick’ style of play that might not be a great complement for Skinner and Ryan. He started with that duo, but before the first period was over he had been swapped with Justin Williams.
Haydn Fleury
He was not perfect, but I liked his debut overall. What jumps out about Fleury is that just like the rest of the young blue line, he is physically capable at an NHL level and not a stretch. He is big enough, strong enough and a good enough skater to compete at this level and should only get better.
What say you Caniacs?
How much fun was it watching Hurricanes hockey again?
What did you see in Saturday’s win?
Go Canes!
Defensive breakdowns left Darling out to dry. Four goals against, zero his fault honestly. Maybe you like a big save on a breakaway to give your team a jolt, but that’s asking a lot. He made some huge saves and was a wall in the shootout. Aho started slow… then just dominated the third period. Love him and Lindholm together — I think both could hit 60 points this year. Slavin made a hell of a play on the Rask goal I think it was… forearm shiver on Eric then got it up ice. He’s just so good. Hanifin had a rough first but settled in nicely afterwards and had a few nice shots on goal, as did Fleury who got caught early once or twice then settled in and looked excellent. IM SO EXCITED RIGHT NOW I CAN BARELY STAND IT
I Meant to say breakdowns early. Otherwise, defense was very stout. Elite shot suppression but we will iron out the breakdowns and not give up so many good chances as the season goes on. Minnesota is dangerous even without Granlund and Parise. We dominated most of this game and could easily have won 3 or 4 to 1 or none.
The failed 5 on 3 with multiple clears worried me. But good bounce back. And good on Jaccob Slavin with the game winner. The second “C” stand for choot out.
The power play definitely looked unorganized tonight. It did so for much of last year as well. With the increased (slash and faceoff) penalties we have to improve on that.
Oh, I also forgot Williams. Just such a good hockey player. All three zones. Wins races. Wins battles. Incredibly smart. He was our best player a good chunk of the game til it became Aho/Slavin/Lindholm time in the third.
I honestly thought that Darling didn’t look ready to play. He showed the poke-check way too early on what proved to be the second goal and hung himself out to dry. And he looked like a deer in the headlights on EStaal’s breakaway. But he came back strong and made some great saves and was a wall on the SO. And ChuckK was absolutely certain that was goalie interference on the 4th Wild goal.
Because he didn’t show up on the scoresheet, Kuokkanen will not get the mention he deserves, except I hope by Peters. He moved that puck, was solid on the forecheck, had some great opportunities. I said to someone this evening he is an upgrade over Stempniak (who, by the way, appeared to be limping during the player announcements).
What, exactly, did you expect Darling to do? Two breakaways, a missed responsibility back door, and the bogus at the end. That’s all he allowed. He made some big stops to keep it 3-2 as we tried to mount our comeback and had good rebound control most of the night, then was square to the shooter and played his angles well in the shootout. Maybe you’d like to see a save on the Staal goal, but again. It’s a breakaway against a guy with how many hundred NHL goals? He picked his spot and hit it as we’ve seen many times before. It was a good shot.
Don’t get me wrong, I am a fan of Darling. He looked tentative at the start. He misplayed the second goal by showing the poke-check too soon completely exposing the net above his right shoulder, which was taken advantage of. That is not a mistake I would have mistaken him to make. I also thought he was passive on the EStaal goal. And like I said, he came back strong no doubt.
I agree on the second goal. Darling had zero chance on the first or the third (Darling was deer in the headlights because Eric stole the puck and broke in a split second).
As for the last goal, I clearly wasn’t aware that you could set picks on goalies in today’s NHL, so I want to see Darling use his size and flatten the next Dumba that gets in his way….no goaltender interference my eye.
Nothing to write home about, but we got the win, which is all that matters in the end
. I would looooove to retire the ‘One point’ chant this year
Wow, that game was a up/ down exciting start for a new season!
My mood kept on changing, and if the beer vendors were EVEN A BIT ORGANIZED (they weren’t) they should have made a whole bunch of money!
Overall, this team has the talent to be VERY DANGEROUS…!
I’m looking forward to TUESDAY, this could be a very promising year.
I just re-watched the game to make sure I had some additional points.
No one has mentioned Kuokkanen. He looked good on the ice–quick if not end-to-end fast. The two plays, one to get the puck then two to make the pass, on the first good Hanifin chance were as good as Aho’s two assists but got thwarted because of a really strong save.
Pesce stated slow, but ended up being our best defender the last two periods. He caught Eric Staal on one near break-away, then broke up a pass when Eric Staal was cheating behind the defense (if you have a chance to watch highlights it is at 2:29 left in the third–quite simply Pesce’s stick might have saved the game). Without that play that no one has yet mentioned, Slavin doesn’t get to make his turn-and-pass that was mentioned in the OP. Finally, on the winning goal, the defender has to back away from Aho to defend because Pesce is heading for the net front, which allows Aho to find the passing lane to Rask. While others are mentioning the first period, on the whole a fairly big plus game.
Slavin was solid early, but he actually struggled a time or two late. Eric Staal gets behind him with 9:10 left in the game; Darling bailed out the breakdown. Also, Slavin went down trying to stop the puck with his leg on the last play. If he is on his feet, I don’t think Koivu gets the tip in. All that being said, his shoot out goal was a beauty.
Fleury looked solid for his first game. Early in the game he made several fundamentally sound exit passes. He also didn’t get outsmarted at any times.
I was not as disappointed as most in the power play. Stalock made several great stops. The 5-on-3 could have used more aggression. But the 5-on-4 chances were actually improved from last season.
Williams, Staal, Lindholm, an especially Aho all looked excellent. Again Stalock kept the game from being 6-3 long before the last wild 7 seconds. For a game that was almost a huge disappointment, the Canes played like the team we should all hope to see for 82 games.
Positives:
Kuokkanen
The 4th line
Aho
Williams
We won
Negatives:
Hanifin
We still lack finishers, outshooting an opponent is great but most weren’t grade A shots
They were much more physical than us.
PP
OT strategy? Intentionally leaving the O zone and passing back to Darling?
Please don’t play the darlin’ song every time Darling makes a big save.
The referees. Although Im not going crazy over the last goal, there was some obvious holding that wasn’t called. It looked like the referees were in playoff form for grabbing and interference.
I am replying to your comments because I didn’t see them before I wrote my own below. You got things right IMO. The most important comment to me was the lack of finishers one. Based upon our history and even last nights game one could say that has been and is a weakness of this team. That is one of the areas where I will be looking to see how things develop this year. IMO we have the talent to develop more grade A scoring chances than in the past. The question will be can we take advantage of the increased grade A chances.
I have to disagree on OT strategy. My first thought during OT was “they’ve spent some time practicing for this.” Usually in OT when one team shoots and doesn’t score it leads to a great opportunity for the other team. Our strategy was to control the puck and deny the Wild offensive opportunities. (Not that different from our 5v5 system.)
The best scoring opportunities come from moving out of our zone with speed and getting past the defense. To do that you need to use the length of the ice.
So our strategy is to move the puck up ice with speed, but not to waste a shot and turn over the puck if the opportunity isn’t there. Move the puck back to our zone, control possession and regroup. True we didn’t score, but we controlled the puck most of OT and didn’t give the Wild many opportunities. When Minn did get the puck our aggressive back checking usually denied them a decent scoring chance.
I think edbenson has it right, gocanes0506. You want to move into the offensive zone with speed. And when you pass back to the goalie you are using him as a 4th D on 3×3. The goalie also gets and holds the puck during shift changes. Just watch how it plays out over the season and see if they go back to it. They have to make some changes in OT time after last year – this is not a bad one.
All of the above comments by Matt, dogbutler, puckgod, raleightj, bwstanley26, and ctcaniac really cover the high and low points of the play during last nights game. There is not much else I could add.
That being said at a different level taking all the above into account what I saw was a team playing with confidence sticking to their system. There were mistakes for sure, but there were no significant ups and downs in their play. In the past the pattern was one glaring error led to a series of them taking the team out of games. In this game, one bad play didn’t lead to another. For example, Darling probably would have liked to stop one or two of the breakaway chances Minnesota had, but he kept his composure. The result was he made a game highlight save right before Aho and Rask brought the puck up the ice and dazzled Minnesota for a goal. Another example, Hanifin had his gaffes, but he didn’t go into a shell. He kept his composure like a veteran. Last thought, Kuokkanen is a keeper based upon last nights game.
Agreed RR. We had our share of defensive gaffs. It was the first game and I am sure that will not continue. The thing is we would have lost this game last year. This team recovers and continues to fight. You take the gaffs out and we pretty much controlled the game.
I think Darling probably had jitters the first game being the starter and number one and all the pressures along with that. He was hung out to dry a few times. 3 for 3 in the skills competition! We lost these game in the past.
I also noticed Kuokkanen several time. He was working hard the entire game. He may stay. In a way, I was happy to see E. Staal get a goal, just as long as we win.
And last, how in the world was that not goal tender interference. Whimpy refs did not want to make a game determining decision, but they tried too. That was ridiculous. The guy in the crease was clearly blocking Darling and he was not forced into the crease. Forslund last night said the Nordstrom goal had a lot of things in the crease also, so maybe things just work out.
I think we at C&C have a fun season to look forward to. This is the best team we have had in some time. Good job recapping Matt.
Oh, and Aho, OMG were those passes scary. He is off the charts with his ability to see the ice. He will be a super star. Good for Rask, finishing.
Let me be brief. A power play goal against early, two breakaway goals, a missed 5-on-3, a goal-against with 0.3 seconds, and then overtime — and we still got two points !!! Folks, this is a game we lost last year, probably in regulation, with 0 points. The high-level is that, yes, like last year, we dominated possession and shot attempts, and yes, like last year, we made a lot of big mistakes, but unlike last year, we won the game. That’s a good sign.
Now, as for the actual play, though he didn’t score last night, I love that Lindholm is shooting – he is going to score more goals this year. And so is TT, who was quiet but lurking. And who scored the big goal late? That’s right, Victor Rask; many, including me, were (and still are) worried about him but he came through last night – another good sign.
Stalock was very good and made some big saves, or this game would not have been as close.
Watch the tape, clean up the lapses, and move on. A tough CBJ team is coming to town – that is going to be a fun game to watch.
dmiller. Yes the game demonstrates that this year’s team might have more ability to recover and win over 60 minutes. Nothing to dampen the preseason excitement. Rask answered the biggest question most had. Lindholm will only play better
I think I’ll say many of the things already said a different way:
In many ways, the Canes were not prepared for this game and should have lost – but they found a way to win.
It’s only one game, but that’s a HUGE shift for a team that has often deserved to win and lost in the past.
The Canes biggest weaknesses this year will be a lack of physicality and scoring.
The shots and stats are very misleading. The Canes were pushed of pucks and/or caught flat footed on too many occasions, and the majority of the Wild’s shots were high quality opportunities. My hope is that the team settles down and finds a better way to handle the opposition when they don’t have the puck.
If the Canes are able to skate, they will have a significant advantage over 90% of the teams in the league. If they get slowed up and bogged down in battles for the puck or space, the odds of winning will be long. Earning that extra split second of time and space on breakouts will be the key to the season.
I really only have 2 player comments to add to those above:
1) Darling wasn’t put in a good spot most of the night, but he didn’t inspire confidence until the shootout. There he was calm and confident in a way I can’t remember seeing. I’ll take more of that please.
2) Aho has the opportunity to be truly special. His vision, and ability to make plays based on it, are among the best I’ve seen in years. I’m probably showing my age, but his pirouette and pass play had me thinking of Dennis Savard in his prime.
I love the idea of him playing with a true monster of a power forward and an elite finisher at the same time. Man what a line like that could do.
Ditto to what most all have said. The MAIN one thing that IMHO changed from last year happened not with the players on the ice but after the first period with Williams interview. Even though down 2-1 mostly because of mistakes (correctable and probably understandable being the first game), Williams had a look of confidence and said as much. I believe that is a huge change from years past where someone may have said the right things, the belief may not have been there. Williams had it and I have to believe that was a guiding light for the rest of team. It didn’t let them get down, or think here we go again… He said the structure was working, the effort was there, just keep doing it! What a huge signing Williams was for this team. He doesn’t have the “C”, but as many have said, he doesn’t need one.
Speaking of the “C”, I thought both Staal and Faulk seemed to play with more of a purpose. Both are normally slow starters, but especially Faulk, I thought seem to have more purpose and was playing like he was supposed to lead.
Wow… what a game. And if I’m rambling, please forgive.. I had a gig last night and didn’t start watching the game till 3:30!
Go Canes!
Also, as for “fishy” (Aho’s new nickname:)), I think it was the middle or end of the second period and I was think how he must be hurt or something because to me, he really hadn’t shown that much during the pre-season or this game… just shows what i know 🙂 Boy, did he look like a different player in the 3rd!
Actually, not a “new” nickname as such. I talked briefly with Sebastian last year at “Skate with the Canes”. I asked him if he preferred Peters’ use of “Seabass” or his Finnish nickname, “Sebe” (I think that is what it was). He laughed and said the other players call him “Fishy”.
As I recall, early in the game Stalock (G) made some really good saves on LABELED SHOTS, and his teammates helped out with a few deflections…Soooo I wasn’t quite as disappointed with the Canes start, as some! Yeh, I was frustrated, but not overly distraught…
It wasn’t a perfect game, but overall not a bad effort, and showed me THIS TEAM HAS SOME UPSIDE! They will out skate MOST teams IMO!
Guess the NHL has set the “standard” for goalie interference for the year – there isn’t any. With an opposition player so totally in the crease as to be partially in the goal, the goalie had no opportunity to make a save. Granted Ryan helped Darling out of the crease, but the replay clearly shows no opportunity for Darling to get back in time to make a save.