A sloppy Game One of the Stanley Cup Final was truly anybody's to take.
Will this be a swing game loss that haunts Washington this summer? This was certainly a contest that they could've stolen:
Winning Play
Vegas made just a few more little plays to pull out the 6-4 victory, starting with the game-opening goal.
Colin Miller had alluded to frustration with his power play unit's lack of production this post-season. Before this series, between he, James Neal, David Perron, Erik Haula, and Nate Schmidt, they had only scored two goals. The other unit, featuring Shea Theodore, among others, had put up seven.
"Theodore's power play unit has been doing a great job of carrying us," admitted Miller.
So this goal must have felt like a load off:
It's actually Theodore, who's about to change, leading the rush. He drops to Perron, who's coming up with speed from behind, along with Haula. This is the most common Golden Knights power play breakout.
In a good example of taking what's given to you, Perron hits Neal with a pass, as three Capitals have taken away the middle of the ice, while the remaining penalty killer is shaded towards the speedy Miller.
Meanwhile, Washington isn't disturbed...yet. Between Neal and Miller gaining the zone, you'd probably take Neal because of his lack of speed relative to Miller.
Predictably, the Caps are able to close on Neal. They force him to give the puck up; he opts to rim it around. Chandler Stephenson has the first step on claiming it; this is good PK'ing.
Miller pinches on Stephenson, preventing an easy clear.
Then Haula harasses Stephenson. Neal joins in, forcing Dmitry Orlov to enter the fray. Haula makes a crafty pass back, through Stephenson and Orlov, to Miller, who takes it toward the middle.
It's the Haula pass which makes this goal.
Two Caps are now on the wrong side of the puck, as the hard-shooting Miller loads up.
"I think they got a little out of position," observed Miller.
If Miller's group heats up, that'll go a long way toward narrowing the gap between Washington's vaunted power play and Vegas's.
Pluses
They say it takes a village to raise a child. In much the same way, it takes a bunch of little plays to score a goal.
Take, for example, the Reilly Smith goal, which gave Vegas a brief 3-2 lead:
A couple plays stand out for me, one intentional, the other accidental.
The goal starts with William Karlsson rushing the puck from behind the net. But pay attention to Theodore.
On the broadcast, "Doc" Emrick stated, "Theodore couldn't get it." But what if he wasn't trying to?
As he's approaching the corner, you can see Theodore look up at Karlsson. Theodore has no intention of touching the puck, but regardless, he draws Devante Smith-Pelly toward it.
Theodore noted, "Obviously, if you can make a guy think that you're going to take the puck up the wall..."
So instead of Theodore getting pinned by Smith-Pelly and possibly turning the puck over -- it would've been a challenging retrieval with Smith-Pelly draped over him -- Karlsson picks it up in stride, swoops around the net, leaving two Capitals, Smith-Pelly and Jay Beagle behind. There's also a hitch in Beagle's stride after he passes Fleury, so you wonder if Flower bothered him.
Heads-up work by both Theodore and Karlsson gave Vegas a clean exit.
"It's all about [Karlsson] communicating with me when I'm going back for it," said Theodore.
Karlsson then hits Marchessault going through the middle. Marchessault bobbles. This bobble draws the attention of Chandler Stephenson, who sees a 50-50.
It's not. Marchessault recovers, Stephenson has committed, and nobody has picked up Deryk Engelland, who's filling Karlsson's lane on the rush.
I asked Marchessault if he faked the bobble, but he didn't. That would've been some play. Regardless, I wonder if Marchessault had fielded the pass cleanly, would Stephenson still have bit toward center ice?
The resulting Engelland entry certainly contributed toward the Smith goal.
So here's a subtle Ryan Reaves play which led to a goal.
And no, I'm not talking about the cross-check on John Carlson, which should've been whistled down.
I was wondering how the Caps allowed Tomas Nosek to be so wide-open on the game-winner. The seam from Theodore to Nosek wouldn't be acceptable even on a power play.
While it's easy to be distracted by Theodore turning Smith-Pelly's knees into jelly, watch Reaves cruising down the Strip. As Theodore's pass goes through, he lifts Michal Kempny's stick.
Based on Carlson's reaction, or lack thereof, he expected someone else, probably Kempny, to cover the backdoor.
While Theodore didn't notice Reaves's role, Nosek did, "I saw it in the last moment. I thought [Kempny] was going to touch it. They kind of lifted sticks."
Great job by Reaves to keep the seam open and good eye from the reader who turned me on to this play:
Check out the stick lift Reaves gets on Kempne on the 1st Nosek goal. Great play that nobody saw.
There's zero doubt that Perron shouldn't be on the ice at this time.
There are five Golden Knights on the ice, including a fallen Marchessault. The Knights don't appear to be changing either.
I have to be honest: Watching live, I missed Perron leaving the bench. Wilson hitting Marchessault, then Reilly Smith hitting the crossbar -- there was a lot going on.
Anyway, Perron doesn't beeline toward Wilson, who is on the other side of the ice. I'm not even sure he's trying to hit Alex Ovechkin, as others have suggested. He certainly gets in the way of a hard-charging Ovechkin; he certainly retaliates with a cross-check, which is what he was actually penalized for:
Rule 70.1 reads:
Leaving the Bench - No player may leave the players' or penalty bench at any time during an altercation or for the purpose of starting an altercation.
At the time, there was no "altercation" going on. Smith had just hit the post.
There also isn't clear evidence that Perron left the bench to "start" an altercation with Ovechkin -- I mean, why? -- or to engage with Wilson.
On the other hand, what was Perron doing? This is a very fair question.
Did he see red when he saw his friend Marchessault laid out? Did he jump on the ice with the purpose of engaging Wilson before pulling back? Did he decide to get revenge for the Wilson hit by taking on Washington's superstar?
Or was the Ovechkin confrontation just a matter of wrong place, wrong time? Did Perron think he was making a line change?
I think the Knights might get away with one here -- there's enough gray area for Perron to escape some serious punishment.
At least in terms of the whistle, Perron is right. You can hear it as he's jumping on. As for his intentions? He's not trying to chase down Wilson & it's not clear that he's really trying to engage Ovechkin either. pic.twitter.com/lur7Rur2Mi
No doubt it's an unnecessary, late hit. It's as borderline as you get from the most borderline of players.
It could've been a major. Late, dangerous hit, possible intent to injure.
It was also very, very calculated.
Marchessault was vulnerable; Wilson could've hit him harder. Also, there was no head contact, stayed on his feet, shoulder to shoulder.
Wilson knew what he doing and who he was hitting.
I don't think he would've minded injuring Marchessault -- but that wasn't his main intention.
I think Wilson wanted to "send a message" -- as outdated as it might be -- to Vegas stars to keep their head up with him around. If the Knights play with an extra awareness of Wilson's presence on the ice, the Caps win.
Wilson also wanted to provoke the opposition -- and he might have succeeded with Perron.
While I don't like the hit -- I would have no issue if the NHL made some example of the repeat offender here -- I don't think they will. The league is targeting head shots, which this wasn't. Marchessault wasn't hurt either.
Wilson knows what he can get away with, and it looks like he's going to escape once again.
As for the game itself...
As usual, Pierre-Edouard Bellemare came through with a spot-on evaluation of this team's work in the neutral zone last night:
I think it was on and off. Sometimes, we played a really strong game. Sometimes, we tried stuff that was...there was no reason to try that at this time of the year. A long layoff, you expect a little bit of not connecting right.
As soon as every line started playing a more direct game, I felt like we got our legs and we started playing better. I think in the second period, Reilly's goal came after three or four shifts of simple, deep work, work, work. Then the goal came.
That was the good.
On the other hand, I think there were too may turnovers. But we were playing a team that was playing well and creating those turnovers. I'm not going to remove the credit where it's deserved.
Bellemare was not speaking of any play specifically.
But one which jumps to mind is Luca Sbisa's pass off Andre Burakovsky that opened scoring for the Caps. The other, non-NZ play is however in the world nobody picked up Nicklas Backstrom walking down the Strip on the second goal.
Those were the most egregious Golden Knights mistakes in a game full of them from both teams.
I expect a much-tighter game from both sides this Wednesday.
***
++++I AM CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR ADVERTISERS! If you, or anyone you know would be interested in placing an ad here at HockeyBuzz, then send me a PM!++++
Vegas Golden Knights Blogger •Vegas Golden Knights Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»