Gilroy, McCabe, Eminger: who should sit on Sunday?
Defense isn't this team's biggest problem; this shouldn't be what the coaching staff spends all of its time agonizing over, but it's still a decision.
We aren't scoring goals, we aren't up to much offensively, and so I understand the initial desire to dress the two offensive defensemen. I think McCabe's been really lousy defensively, though. Worse than Gilroy. Gilroy's been muscled off the puck a few times, but McCabe's just looked bad out there. Our power play with him has been awful - how much is he really helping on that end?
McCabe. What has he done? The PP looks horrible, which is why he was brought here. All he seems to do is shoot the puck into defenders. He had 6 shots blocked game 1...didnt count this game, but there were definitely a few
He's been fine though. He hasn't made many mistakes.
I'd keep the defensive-pairings the same for game 3. We've done a fairly good job in our blue-line. It's the other blue-line we need to focus on.
I think it's the lack of physicality and sometimes weak defensive positioning that would prompt most people to vote for him. And even though he's got our only goal, he's not exactly what I would call an offensive defenseman.
I think it's the lack of physicality and sometimes weak defensive positioning that would prompt most people to vote for him. And even though he's got our only goal, he's not exactly what I would call an offensive defenseman.
I don't think Emingers going to do much more than Gilroy from a defensive standpoint. Steve will provide more oomph on the back-end, but he's more of a liability too, considering he puts himself out of position by going out of his way to check the opposition. He also takes pretty dumb boarding penalty's.
Wsh's not really pushing us around. We're not going to get rocked at the Garden.
Those plays happen 50 times a night, and generally go unnoticed. Puck touched two more sticks before it went in. You can't fault Gilroy for the goal.
I noticed that one because:
1) it lead to one of the two goals
2) he started the whole chain of events that lead to the goal. If he wasn't knocked off the puck then the rest of the team wouldn't be scrambling.
1) it lead to one of the two goals
2) he started the whole chain of events that lead to the goal. If he wasn't knocked off the puck then the rest of the team wouldn't be scrambling.
You didn't notice anything. Sam and Joe pointed it out during the goals replay.
The puck went in about 3 seconds after he was beat. A lot of Dmen in this league wouldn't have prevented that play.
I'm not going to start a pointless argument about a pointless player.
Nobody's arguing. We discussing Gilroy's performance. I'm not suggesting he wasn't outmuscled there; I think a lot of dmen give up that same exact opportunity. Sometimes because of strength, other times because of speed. Or positioning. It's a routine play, imo. Quick outlet pass, followed by a perfect feed to the slot and a shot where Lundqvist has no chance.
It's along the lines of trying to blame Drury for Staal's turnover in game1. People reaching for reason's to hate, imo. Somebody's gotta be the scapegoat on these forums. Regardless of how the goal was scored.
Sometimes, it's nobody's fault. I personally think Gilroy was more responsible for the second goal (PP goal). That's a play I have a problem with. That's a play where his fundamentals vanished into thin air. Piss poor decision to move out and block a shot; the forward on the ice there (drury?) was responsible for that part of the ice, in that specific situation. Then Gilly follows it up with an even weaker attempt of blocking the puck.
Nobody's talking about that play though, which surprises me a bit.
but I think we need the more physical and defensively solid guy, a.k.a. Eminger
LOL
