

Here are the numbers:
Scoring chances total as follows, Canada first. ES 10-7, PP 4-0, SH 2-5 Total 16-12. Of note in the first the Russians only have three chances, all on the PP. In the second they again only have three, this time though they are at ES. Also of note, no scoring chances against when on the PP, more on that in a bit.
Corsi totals as follows, Canada first. ES 49-37, PP 4-1, SH 2-12. Canada cuts their events against down by almost a third. Only four events with the man advantage, one of those is the Esposito goal 6v5 and one is the Cournoyer goal. Indeed each Corsi event with the advantage is a scoring chance.
Total faceoffs 5v5 - offensive zone 14, neutral zone 20, defensive zone 11 - note that in the first two periods there were only five defensive zone draws for Canada. Pretty good, they had twelve in the Russian zone. In the third there are six draws in Canada's zone at ES but half of those come after the game is out of reach.
Total faceoffs 5v4 - offensive zone 3, neutral zone 5, defensive zone 1 - the defensive zone draw was because of an icing at the beginning of the third
Total faceoffs 4v5 - offensive zone 1, neutral zone 2, defensive zone 6 - notes below on Sinden handling the defensive zone draws.
On the back end on the PK they run out White and Stapleton quite a bit. The PK runs from being very good to just hanging on by a thread at times. The first kill they only give up one chance but its an absolute five bell job, cross crease pass, your man is wide open and Esposito slides over nice and easy and makes it look easy. The second PK its White and Stapleton again as well as the Mahovlich brothers, a couple of chances against this time, including another one that Esposito makes the proverbial 'miraculous save' on.
So this is one difference between game one and two. The Canadians have the better of the play in the first, indeed they don't allow a scoring chance against at ES but Esposito bails out the PK twice. Goaltending.
There is one kill in the second period. Here Sinden sends out Park and Lapointe. The results are far better. The only scoring chance is one for Frank Mahovlich; his younger brother puts on one of the best exhibitions I have ever seen as he kills about a minute of it off by himself.
The game turns on two kills in the third. With the Canadians up 2-0 the Russians burn Bergman and Park with a breakaway pass; the Russian misses and then passes the puck to an uncovered teammate who scores. Almost immediately afterwards they earn another PP. And this is where Mahovlich (Peter) scores an unbelievable goal. The rest of the PK is uneventful as first Lapointe and White and then Park and Bergman so the honours with varied forwards.
The Russians PP almost gets as many scoring chances as they do at ES. Stopping it is key in this game and in the future and the Canadians manage to get the job done tonight but the results are a little uneven and one can see where this is going to be a problem down the road.
The D pairings are fairly reasonable. Park and Bergman take on the majority of the defensive draws in the first two periods while Stapleton and White are sheltered, they get all neutral or offensive zone faceoffs up until the third. Savard and Lapointe only get a couple of defensive draws in the first two periods. Truth is though, the Russians get very few draws in Canada's zone in periods one and two so while I do think Sinden runs out Park and Bergman as much as he can I also think he is able to do so because Canada has the advantage. In the third the Russians come on a little and get more draws in the Canadian zone. I think Sinden goes to a regular rotation at this point for a few reasons. He can't run Park and Bergman out over and over again. Also while they have been good they have not been great. And finally I think that the other two pairs have been fine and thus have gained the coach's confidence. White and Stapleton are in the red when it comes to scoring chances but they are in the black in Corsi (as they should be considering their zone starts) and the reality is they are pretty solid back there. Its not like game one where Seiling and Awrey are on their heels. These guys do okay and actually in the third they end up just fine even with the defensive zone starts.
The real revelation though is the Savard/Lapointe pairing. When they are on the ice the Russians do not threaten. Their Corsi numbers are fabulous and they come out on top in scoring chances as well. Lapointe, the spare in game one, plays the PP and when the game is on the line it is he and White who get sent out to kill the penalty.
And Savard? Think Duncan Keith if you're looking for a style of play. Effortless, he skates miles and miles, relieving the Russians of the puck time and time again, spinning away from them easily, moving it up ice. Watching him and Lapointe and knowing that Larry Robinson will join them on the blue in Montreal you realize how their club was so dominant for years.
Up front lets start with the spares. Goldsworthy plays two shifts in total. In the first he gets an offensive zone faceoff and the Russians immediately take it down the ice and lay siege to the Canadian net. His second and last shift is on the PP. The PP does nothing while he is on and the only play of note is his bumping of Tretiak as he skates by after the whistle. He has amazing sideburns though. Mutton chops or goalie sticks I think they would be called.
We noted Peter Mahovlich's work on the PK and other than the same ES shift referenced above he sees very little of the ice otherwise early on. As the game wears on though he finds himself spelling Mikita a few times. Either Mikita's back is injured (he struggles with back problems later in his career) or, more likely, the aging superstar's legs aren't there. In the first period Mikita looks a bit lost, his timing is off, as might be expected, more worrisome is that he looks slow. He is sheltered, like White and Stapleton, but as the game wears on he takes on a bigger role and in the third he looks excellent, breaking into openings for scoring chances and setting up Frank Mahovlich for the backbreaker goal soon after Peter Mahovlich's shortie. On that shift he speeds into the zone and gets a nice chance, then wheels back once the Russians gain possession. As the Russian defenceman begins to come out of the zone Mikita charges in suddenly and strips him of the puck. Going behind the net his original pass is stopped but he retrieves the puck and feeds Mahovlich in the slot for the goal.
In the third, probably because Mikita has found his legs, his line is no longer sheltered. They take draws in all three zones, including two consecutive in their own on one shift, and they have the best marks for Corsi and scoring chances of any forward line in the third after two fairly quiet periods. Mikita does take the shortest shifts of any Canadian forwards though, which probably helps his cause. He races out, does his thing, heads to the bench. Here Peter Mahovlich gets a few extra shifts as he jumps on to finish the shift.
One last thing about Mikita. Regular readers here know that he was my favourite player growing up, the best player on a mediocre Blackhawks' team. I never saw him in his prime though, when he was arguably the best hockey player in the world and as a boy I probably only saw him play a dozen times, if that, and I cannot recall any of that at all. So I have to admit I was a little excited to see him play and as you can tell I kept an eye on him. He would only play one more game in the series and seeing him struggle in the first period I can guess why. He's no longer the speedy youngster who centred a line so fast they were called the Scooter Line. No surprise that after a summer of doing nothing he has a tough time with the Russians when he steps on the ice. But the fire that shows when he is arguing his points with the officials and as he discusses situations with Sinden on the bench soon lifts the older man and in the second he begins to come on and in the third one can see what he once was as he nearly beats Tretiak himself, sets up Mahovlich, drives the play up ice as his club tries to hold the lead. It was a lot of fun to watch.
Ok so a couple of more notes on the Mikita line. As I said they were sheltered in the first two periods and I would have to say that was because of their pivot but Mahovlich who was so dominant in the first game, doesn't even get a sniff at all. The Russians are matching and so I'm thinking this has something to do with it plus its a closer checking game. In any case for the big M its not happening. Cournoyer does little as well but about midway through the game he begins to get going. He had gaudy numbers in game one but he was riding coattails for those, imo, as Mahovlich and Esposito drove the bus. Tonight though he begins to live up to his nickname. He takes a pass but he is offside as he splits the D in the neutral zone. His next shift Frank Mahovlich hits him, again splitting the D, at the blue, this time he is barely offside. There is no replay but its damn close. And so at the beginning of the third Park steps over his own blue on the PP and hits Cournoyer as he tears down the right wing. He hits him in full stride and the Russians still haven't caught him today and he scores one of the most beautiful goals you will ever see. Simple as hell. Dman hits winger in full stride with the headman and the winger cuts in and beats the goalie from his offwing. a thing of beauty though.
And that seems to give the little guy that confidence and so he and Mahovlich and Mikita buzz the Russians in the third and its a good thing because the Canadians need it. A failure in the third from these three and the game may have ended differently. Instead they have a pretty nice Corsi and while they are low event when it comes to scoring chances they are in the black and that matters.
Esposito drives the bus, man. He had an excellent game one and for his troubles he loses his wingers and gets Parise and Cashman. These guys are solid but they have hands of cement, its all hack and whack, and so Espo is on his own and he ends up even steven, which will do in this case. Plus he draws two penalties. The first two periods this line is pretty solid, its only in the third where they take a bit of a bath and its really not too bad. They're not sheltered and they get shit moving in the right direction quite a bit. A few longer shifts hurt them a bit and they get dinged on those. Overall though they hold their own and while Espo's goal is 6v5 its pretty well ES as discussed earlier.
And not mentioned yet. The Canadians play it pretty dirty this game. In G1 Clarke slewfooted a Russian and then clubbed him over the head for good measure and in this game he is sticking everything that moves. He is joined by Parise, who bulldogs one Russian to the ice, Mikita, who seems to have forgotten his Lady Byngs but perhaps not his homeland as he comes in stick high again and again and Cashman who grins toothlessly as he rakes his opponents across the face liberally. A dangerous game to play with the Russian PP but certainly it would have not been an easy game to play.
Finally we come to the Clarke line. In game one their Corsi numbers were not great but they were pretty solid. They gave up few chances and invariably got the puck moving in the right direction. Tonight they are killer. No reward on the scoresheet but without them its probably a different game. In the first two periods they get the bulk of the Dzone assignments (there are few of course) and they invariably finish in the Russian end. Their scoring chance numbers lead the team, both by raw numbers and differential, and their Corsi numbers are over the top. They are dominant. A fantastic game by all three. And this mostly against Kharlamov who is not a factor and ends up sitting for nearly the entire first half of the third, when the game is decided, as he garners a misconduct after freaking out after Clarke abuses him rather vigorously at the end of the second.
So that's game two. The Canadians are better and they get a deserved result. They're not a whole lot better but they are better, especially at ES. The Russians get few chances at ES and its hard to win a game like that and on the PP Esposito turns aside their best chances. And at the end of the game Hewitt is talking about how conditioning is no longer a factor for the Canadians. Funny how that narrative has turned so quickly, eh?Two games in and the Canadians are the better team in both. Next up, Winnipeg.
20 comments:
"The real revelation though is the Savard/Lapointe pairing. When they are on the ice the Russians do not threaten."
Some brainiac decided to sit both in Game 4.
And Savard in game 5.
Those losses didn't happen by accident.
Did your son get to hear you cheer?!
Holy Kharlamov, Batman, your review is beyond totally awesome. Really. The excitement and thrills you must've been feeling come through in your words. I might actually go buy the Series now. I hadn't before because it was lacking one Robert J. Orr, but now I think I just might.
I'm pretty sure I 've never seen a complete game either, but if memory serves, Game 8 was piped through the school intercom system. During recess I can remember huddling outside with my buds under a speaker so we could follow along.
Thank you.
Thanks Pat. Brilliant stuff again.
Sinden was a more modern coach than I realized. I suppose in Game 1 he wasn't dead sure about a lot of his own players, and probably didn't have a clue about the Russians. By the second game both teams are clearly making adjustments.
Using the centre to win the draw to the board side on the PK ... I watched hockey for years without noticing that. Not until a colour guy (Green on Sportsnet maybe?) started pointing it out about 8 or 10 years ago. After that I noticed
that MacTavish was a maniac on the issue. Rightly or wrongly.
Going by the bit about the controversy re last change in the firs period, and the Russians bringing guys on and off the ice before faceoffs ... they were both running the bench by zone and opposition.
It will be cool to see how things change once they get to Russia. The Soviets had probably never played on the small surface before, and the Canucks had probably never played on the big sheet.
Jebus, all my beliefs about this series are crumbling away, one by one. And it's just game 2.
Fantastic work again, Pat. I am loving this stuff.
Great obs on the RH/LH dichotomy on the draws, like Vic I would have thought that was a fairly recent development but it sounds like Sinden - with a rich assortment of quality options - was all over it way back then.
Mr. dB: Savard sat in Games 4 and 5 cuz he picked up an injury in Game 3. He was fortunate to have two weeks between the Canada and USSR legs of the series, and even then he wasn't quite ready to go in Game 5. Canada won the four games he completed, tied the one he left partway through, and lost the three he didn't play. A small sample for a WOWY analysis, but an impressive result.
Serge Savard was a great, great player. I always thought he was underrated in terms of the degree of his contribution to the Habs dynasty.
Mr D. - yeah I am interested to see game three and what happens there. They have a nice win in game two and then are close to a win in game three so one would think that they have a decent lineup put together. Instead Lapointe and Savard are pulled, Mikita too and amongst others we have Hadfield, Seiling and Awrey all drawing back in in game four. All three were pretty poor in game one so its hard to see how that makes any sense. There's politics involved I suspect, especially seeing as how Eagleson is prominent. I would not be surprised if players were promised a certain number of games.
An interesting sidenote to that point is the situation where Hadfield and others left the club. It was always painted as these guys quitting but it turns out that there was an agreement and thirteen players were going to leave when it became apparent that they were not going to play in Russia, including Mikita. Eagleson agreed to it as it was felt that they may as well go home and prepare for the upcoming season. What happened is that Mikita stayed on so he could captain the team in an exhibition game in Prague and he and many of the rest decided to stay on for various reasons. Only four ended up leaving and then Eagleson threw them under the bus.
Dirty fucking prick that guy. What a piece of shit.
Great stuff re: Savard Bruce, I had thought that he had been injured but was not clear on the timing, that clears that up. And thanks for the compliments.
Thanks spOILer - yeah its terrific stuff, I'm glad that I'm conveying that. Probably the most enjoyable thing for me is just seeing these guys play. I saw a lot of Lapointe and Savard and Cournoyer as a boy but can't remember a damn thing about them, Esposito, Clarke and Park too. And of course I mentioned Mikita, never mind the Mahovlich brothers and Ron Ellis. For me that may be the most fun part of the whole exercise, seeing the greats from that generation play. Would have loved it if Orr and Hull had suited up as well.
Thanks Vic - yeah I was taken aback when the first whistle went less than a minute in and off goes Esposito's line and here comes Clarke but then the Russians have two lines out there and then Mikita's line jumps on and then they jump off again. All of my notions that had been based on game one were washed away right then and there.
I would agree with your analysis of game one. Even with the shitty goaltending and Awrey and Seiling and a bunch of other guys struggling Canada is the better team and pushing hard until about six minutes left so I think Sinden was just rolling them, figuring he had to see what he had and why not, if they'd a bounce or two they'd be up.
But in G2 its a whole different ball game. He's definitely sheltering guys until they get rolling (Mikita line) or they prove they can handle the shit (White/Stapleton). There is the use of Mikita and Clarke to take a draw on the PK and then them going to the bench immediately afterwards. He adjusts both the PK and PP on the fly based on circumstance. Clarke and his line are the go to guys in defensive situations.
Is really fascinating stuff. Julian is going to have game three soon I think although he is going to be on a plane back to Asia soon I believe. In the meantime I am on vacation but I should be able to get the faceoff data for G1 as well as a summary of the numbers for both games so far, a running total that we'll update along the way. That will fill the void until he has something to post.
Phenomenal stuff Pat. Just amazing.
Thank-you.
I'm surprised you didn't use Doughty as your Savard comp (instead of Keith).
;o)
At least we have the perspective of history as far as the Eagle is concerned. Nice to know he landed in jail. But yeah, what an asshole.
Phil Esposito said it perfectly: once the Canadians got into shape, they out-classed the Russians. He felt after game 8 they were in shape and that they would have won 8 straight after that.
He claimed the only reason it was a series was because the Canadians never trained in the summer. That's what training camp was for.
Ok, starting G3 right now, finally.
The GF's spare computer I was gonna use to run the game while I did the spreadsheet has a password on it, which I've conveniently forgotten, but I think I can do this on my own computer, though it may take longer.
I'll take some notes on what I see, but I hope no one is expecting the same sort of writeup Pat did here.
Also, I just bought myself a new single malt, so if it's really tasty, I may get distracted from the game.
Jesus, not gonna lie here, I've been watching this for two hours now, and only just finished the first. I've watched every second of this game at least three times I think, just trying to track who's on the ice. If this were HD or Foster Hewitt would actually say "Park" or "Bergman" or whoever a little more often instead of just "Canada", this would be much much easier. Sometimes I've gotta go back 30 seconds to try and figure out who the D are on an event.
Thankfully Henderson and Mikita wear helmets, makes identifying their lines much easier.
I'm sorry, there's no way my analysis is going to be as indepth as Pat's is. I'm just trying to keep track of who's on the ice for each event, it's almost too much to note which guys are playing which Soviets more often than not. I'm taking a few notes of things that strike me re: icetime for certain guys, but that's about the best I can do at this point.
I'll do one more period tonight, and do the 3rd tomorrow.
Hang in there Julian, we're rootin for ya!
Great stuff Pat. I've never seen the series or any of these legends of the game in action, so your descriptions are great. Not too surprised about Esposito's dominance though. Wasn't he the best forward in the NHL at the time?
Julian - no worries, pal, just do your best, get me what you can, I'm going to watch the game and will add my impressions as well.
Thanks Scott. Yeah Esposito probably was the best forward in the league at the time or certainly top three, LT or Bruce might be able to confirm. I always thought of him as a Tim Kerr type though - standing in front of the net and banging in the slam dunks, not really doing much of anything else. Not so though.
"Foster Hewitt would actually say "Park" or "Bergman" or whoever a little more often instead of just "Canada""
It doesn't matter actually. When Foster speaks:
"Park" means Canadian with long-hair.
"Ellis" means medium-sized Canadian with dark hair.
"Cournoyer" means player with thinning hair.
For all the credit Canada gets for "playing with heart" in this series, there sure aren't a lot of people willing to call the cheap crap they were doing (unlike you).
I thought we were the good guys (or something like that).
Vic, Roger Nielson was one coach I can remember who wasn't a complete fanatic about PK centres winning draws to the boards. He preferred it (better there than in front of the net), but every now and then he'd let his centre put it to the front of the net where the defenceman was waiting to get it out.
Wow, great work. I've never seen this (have the DVD, but sits unwatched currently), but looking forward to watching and comparing.
Just wondering, I've seen a lot of comments about the 87 Cup. I found a copy years ago, and would be willing to help with that. Pat, how can I get you a copy of that? I've got 4 DVDs with each of the games, and a round robin one.
nightslide AT (nospam) gmail Dot com
By that stage Foster Hewitt was about as good at player identification as Bob Cole is now.
No argument about Espo being an elite forward, even as he was overshadowed by Orr in some quarters he won five Art Ross Trophies, led the league in goals six years running, was the first All-Star centre six years running, won two Hart Trophies, etc. I considered him the top forward in the game for a few years there, only Hull, Mikita, Mahovlich, a young Clarke and an aging Howe belonged in the conversation during Espo's prime.
nightslide - thanks and I will be sending you an email shortly about '87, I hope that we can figure something out, that would be great!
dawgbone - well it was the Cold War and of course regardless we are alawys the good guys aren't we ;)
its hockey, its vicious at times, that's the way it goes
Post a Comment