Midweek Roundup 4.19.23
Lessons from Stanley Cup Playoff Game 1s, More Player Movement, and Looking Forward to Jacob Truscott’s ‘23-24
With the puck dropping on the Stanley Cup Playoffs Monday evening, we open this week with a survey of three Game 1s that played out in the last forty-eight hours: Oilers-Kings, Devils-Rangers, and Maple Leafs-Lightning. In all three games, the visitor won, and, on all three occasions, it felt impossible to avoid dipping into the clichéd well of playoff lessons. So what can the losers (in this case, the Oilers, Devils, and Leafs) take away from their respective setbacks?
The Kings came from behind to win Game 1 in Edmonton by a 4-3 scoreline in overtime. The structural arc of this series was in little doubt before the puck dropped: the Kings would try to slow the Oilers’ vaunted rush attack (i.e. Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl) with their 1-3-1 neutral zone trap.
In the early going, Edmonton found a variety of ways to bypass the Kings’ structure—quick re-entries, taking advantage of LA turnovers in the Kings’ offensive zone, and getting pucks behind LA’s defensemen to force retrievals. Draisaitl opened the scoring, then Evan Bouchard added a second at 5-on-3 after an absurd McDavid rush drew a penalty. Through forty minutes, the Oilers lead 2-0 and appeared in total control.
With the game at 4-on-4 early in the third, the Oilers had a chance to score a third that would effectively kill the game. McDavid outflanked LA defenseman Matt Roy and broke in on Joonas Korpisalo with Draisaitl as a trailer. However, a sprawling pokecheck from deadline acquisition Vladislav Gavrikov disrupted the chance and sent Los Angeles the other way on the counter. Anze Kopitar fed Roy, who played in Adrian Kempe, who beat Stuart Skinner—a gorgeous backhand finish to complete a perfect counterattack. With almost a full period to play, LA trailed by just one.
Eight minutes later, Draisaitl cleaned up a mess at the netfront to fire home a third through traffic and restore the two-goal lead, only for Kempe to answer again. With sixteen seconds to play and the Kings at 6-on-4, Kopitar found a loose puck in the crease to tie the score.
After a high-stick (and an extremely high-stick at that) nullified a would-be Oilers winner in OT, a crisp passing sequence set up Alex Iafallo with the game winner on another Kings’ power play.
So, what do we take away? The simple and obvious answer is that these games are never over. I have a somewhat facetious theory of clock management that there is always enough time for a comeback, and that is usually true even for a patient comeback. (This theory will be unassailable in college football for as long as the clock stops after each first down, but the Patriots’ 28-3 comeback over the Falcons in the Super Bowl shows it can hold true beyond the context of that collegiate timekeeping quirk. In hockey, it’s even easier to hold as true, since you will never run out of possessions the way you might in football, and it only takes an instant to create a scoring play.)
One of the stories of the NHL season to date has been the abundance of (multi-goal) comebacks. In the regular season, 550 teams came from behind to win, the second highest total ever trailing only the ‘21-22 season and by just one comeback. The Kings’ path back illustrated the vulnerabilities that have held the McDavid/Draisaitl era Oilers from the NHL’s elite class: An inability to control games when they cannot simply race over and past an opponent. In other words, Edmonton struggles to take the sting out of an opponent with possession and a slow pace to see out games, which, admittedly, is not an easy thing to do, especially against a hungry playoff opponent.
Kempe’s first was the most obvious and cruelest example of this dynamic—Draisaitl and McDavid themselves caught up ice and unable to back check in time to cut out a counterattack the other way, but that was far from the only moment in which the opportunistic Kings exposed Edmonton’s structural shortcomings. The end result was a squandered lead and missed opportunity for the Oilers to take command of the series at home from the jump.
If Game 1 in Edmonton showed the fragility of leads in today’s NHL, Game 1 between the Rangers and Devils in Newark showed that sometimes an early advantage does foreshadow what is to follow in a 5-1 Ranger walk. New Jersey actually out-attempted the Rangers, but only 42% of those attempts made it to the net—more than half blocked along the way or fired wide. The Devils’ lone goal came on a Jack Hughes penalty shot late in the third, with the game well out of reach.
For the Rangers, the formula for playoff success was always going to hinge on decisiveness. Despite undeniable talent up front and along the blue line, these Rangers can’t quite match the 200-foot depth of the NHL’s elite and thus are unlikely to control play. Instead, Gerard Gallant’s team banks on the likes of Mika Zibanejad, Artemi Panarin, Patrick Kane, and Vladimir Taraenko to create offense on minimal opportunities. For the Devils, that means success has to come from straining New York’s ability to absorb pressure by hemming them into the defensive zone. That did not happen, at any point, Tuesday night in the Prudential Center.
A broken play, poise from K’Andre Miller, and a precise finish from Tarasenko gave the Rangers an early lead, but it was the 2-0 goal from Chris Kreider, just before the midpoint of the first, that seemed to doom New Jersey. With the man advantage, Adam Fox threaded a shot-pass to Chris Kreider’s tape for an easy redirect past a helpless Vitek Vanacek.
The Rangers’ power play is a formidable weapon—one of the NHL’s best over the past two seasons. As such, there’s no shame in conceding a goal to it. What was concerning was the way the Devils’ diamond PK immediately yielded a chance from the Rangers’ best passer to its most reliable finisher without applying a modicum of pressure to either player.
The obvious lesson here is one about playoff intensity. New Jersey and New York both rely on a number of young players in prominent roles, but one team played its way to last year’s Eastern Conference Final, while the other has won exactly one playoff game since 2012. The Rangers arrived in Newark with a surgical sense of purpose. When Kreider made the score 2-0, the Devils also trailed 7-1 in shots. There were fifty-plus minutes to play, but the outcome was all but assured.
For New Jersey, the good news is that, at least to some extent, you can shrug off this game, almost as if taking a first-pitch strike. It’s not ideal, and you’ve cut down on your own margin for error, but now you’ve seen a pitch, gotten a sense of the pace you have to match, and you can take your best shot at a counter-punch in Game 2. The blue sweaters throughout the Prudential Center’s lower bowl suggested that home-ice was never going to be much of an advantage for the Devils anyway. Perhaps Luke Hughes—a healthy scratch in Game 1—can also provide some extra offensive punch somewhere along the line.
Even though we saw this exact match-up a year ago, Lightning-Leafs was the first round series I was most excited for—the Leafs on their Charlie Brown-and-the-football quest to break free of the first round and the wizened Lightning seeking to squeeze out another deep playoff run. The two sides are also a unique illustration of the way that—despite how we often talk about them—speed and skill do not always go hand-in-hand. Both these teams have phenomenal skill atop the lineup, but neither has great speed.
On this occasion, Tampa took control with the simplest possible approach: crashing the net, early and often. The Bolts’ fourth line of Pierre-Édouard Bellemare, Corey Perry, and Pat Maroon broke through with Bellemare tapping the rebound off a Perry wrap-around in for the opener just 1:19 into the game. It wasn’t ideal goalkeeping from Ilya Samosonov by any stretch, but the Lightning’s tenacity in the slot forced the opportunity. Anthony Cirelli made it 2-0 by taking advantage of another generous rebound from Samsonov with another goal made possible by the Lightning out-working Toronto at the goal mouth. Then, with just 2.6 seconds to play in the first, Nikita Kucherov delivered what felt like a kill shot with a power play one timer to make it 3-0.
The Leafs mounted a counter-surge in the second and cut the deficit to one by virtue of two power play goals. First, Ryan O’Reilly finished a tic-tac-toe passing sequence that spread the Lightning kill thin in high ice, then William Nylander took advantage of the Bolts sitting back and yielding him room in the outer recesses of the offensive zone to beat Andrei Vasilevsky in an imperious show of poise and patience.
However, just as the Leafs seemed to come alive, Tampa answered with a special teams-heavy counter-punch of its own. Brayden Point scored from point blank range to make it 4-2 with the man advantage, then a foolhardy and reckless Michael Bunting major gave the Lightning a five-minute power play. Corey Perry scored (just barely), the Leafs lost a dubious goaltender interference challenge, the Lightning took a 5-on-3 advantage due to the resulting bench minor, and Point scored—another goal within the final five seconds of a period. It was 6-2 after forty minutes, and the game was done.
What do we take away from this Game 1? To start, there does seem to be a lesson in the fickle nature of momentum generated via the power play. Toronto’s two second-period goals brought them back to within reasonable striking distance, but not much was changing about how the game looked at even strength. Meanwhile, we know that (postseason) NHL justice tends toward quid pro quo—a power play one way will surely meet a power play the other way (a relationship that only grows closer when the initial power play produces a goal). As such, momentum generated via power play success will more than likely require equal success on the penalty kill, lest that good work be washed away. On Tuesday, the Lightning were able to erase their penalty-killing foibles by putting the game out of reach when they took their turn on the man advantage.
The broader takeaway has to concern the sense of despair that has returned to Toronto in another April. The Leafs have reached the point where their blend of regular season success and utter inability to make a playoff run has lent their regular seasons a pro forma feel. No, they haven’t won a Presidents’ Trophy, but it would be near impossible for Toronto to forge a meaningful positive impression in the regular season.
Normally, Leaf postseason blow-ups require a much slower build—teetering on the precipice of success before the explosion of failure arrives. This time, it took just a shift or two of postseason play for the feeling of doom to set in.
While no one can match Tampa’s playoff nous, this Toronto team cannot claim playoff naïvité like the Devils. Of the three losers we’ve reviewed, it is the Leafs who feel hardest to come up with a silver lining for. If there is one, it’s that Sheldon Keefe can legitimately re-constitute his lineup by moving O’Reilly from Tavares’ wing to centering his own line, which reports from today’s Leafs’ skate indicate will be the case.
To zoom out a bit, these Game 1s ultimately don’t tell us much about what to expect. It is about as common to see a Game 1 that sets a tone the series will not end up pursuing as one that does. Still, in pragmatic terms, a series opener does condition what will follow.
Now, the Devils will have to play from behind, but that might suit their style and youth better than holding on. The Oilers can take comfort in feeling as though they should have won their opener, and that their firepower still makes them a favorite moving forward. The Leafs…well, at least for the Leafs, disaster came early, and that hasn’t been the case often during the Auston Matthews era, so perhaps, this Game 1 loss will bring about a different (and welcome) end to a round one series than Toronto has mustered in recent years. Or it won’t. It is still the Leafs. Happy playoffs, everyone. Happy playoffs.
More Player Movement: Transfers In and Out
In the past week, two members of the 2022-23 University of Michigan men’s hockey team found new homes for the ‘23-24 season via the transfer portal. Eric Ciccolini will be heading to Clarkson and the North Country next year, while Kehton Pehrson heads west to North Dakota; both will arrive as graduate transfers, having spent the past four years in Ann Arbor.
In four seasons with Michigan, Ciccolini scored fifteen goals and gave nineteen assists in eighty-five games. He will head to Potsdam as a 15.6% career shooter, including a 24.1% conversion rate as a senior.
The 2019 seventh round draft choice of the New York Rangers saw his career severely hampered by injury. Playing just four games as a junior was the obvious example, but Ciccolini missed time in each of his four seasons. These repeated interruptions made it difficult to establish a role, especially with several consecutive loaded recruiting classes filling in beneath him.
By his senior year, Ciccolini didn’t quite fit into Michigan’s top six, but his profile (as a plus skater and shooter) made more sense atop the lineup than toward its bottom. This dynamic is of course related to his injuries, but I think it also helped motivate a transfer. Ciccolini might not be suited to a featured role on a team with Michigan’s high-end talent, but he could certainly produce more from a volume perspective if given more premium minutes in a different lineup. In this regard, Clarkson should provide him with a great opportunity.
Meanwhile, Keaton Pehrson’s transfer came as a bit more of a surprise, given that the void he will fill in Grand Forks bears a striking resemblance to the one he leaves behind in Ann Arbor. Pehrson had the unique pleasure of skating alongside three different first round NHL draft choices as partners with Michigan: first Cam York, then Owen Power a year ago, and this season Luke Hughes.
He explained the move to Brad Schlossman of the Grand Forks Herald by saying “When you think of college hockey, some of the most historic programs are North Dakota and Michigan. To be able to experience that is pretty exciting.” In this sentiment, Pehrson provided a different way to think about the portal’s utility: Players can now become part of multiple blue blood programs in ways that were mostly impossible prior to the portal’s advent. Given that the two schools are not direct rivals, at least for the moment, it can be cause for celebration on Pehrson’s behalf.
North Dakota does not bring back a single returner from last year’s blue line, so Pehrson is posed to slot into the Fighting Hawks’ top pair. He would have been in the running for top minutes with Michigan, but he found an even more wide open blue line with UND. Perhaps the greatest benefit is that the drive from his home in Lakeville, Minnesota to Grand Forks is about half the distance of the drive from Lakeville to Ann Arbor.
At the same time as Pehrson announced his intention to depart, Michigan received a commitment from Marshall Warren, erstwhile Boston College defenseman. Warren arrives as a grad transfer having spent last season as BC’s captain, and he is a 2019 sixth round pick of the Minnesota Wild. Thanks to his poise with the puck and strong skating, he should fit in naturally along the Wolverine blue line.
Player movement is probably not done, but Warren goes a long way toward establishing a high floor for Michigan’s blue line. In the immediate future, we might see him alongside Jacob Truscott, Seamus Casey and Ethan Edwards reviving their partnership from this season, and then Johnny Druskinis, Luca Fantilli, and Steven Holtz rotating to comprise the third pair. That approach would build on pre-existing chemistry, while also featuring multiple upperclassmen in featured roles (which has not exactly been a common occurrence in recent years).
Of course, the biggest variable for Michigan’s ‘23-24 prospects remains Adam Fantilli. According to a report from Adam Wodon of College Hockey News, Fantilli (and Logan Cooley) appear to be leaning toward returning to school for their respective sophomore seasons.
Which team selects Fantilli remains a major variable, but I think another key factor to consider at this point in the process is the context of Shane Wright and Juraj Slafkovsky. Slafkovsky went number one in last June’s Draft to Montreal, a surprise selection that yielded an underwhelming rookie season. Injuries slowed him down and eventually ended his campaign early, but even on a team that knew it would be in contention for another lottery pick, Slafkovsky struggled to make the lineup and, when he did, played just 12:13 a game.
Wright was cast into a different circumstance—slipping to number four in the first round and the Seattle Kraken, who despite their poor inaugural season had designs on making the playoffs. Despite being billed as a potential franchise center of distinct defensive acumen, Wright found it even harder to make the lineup and earn ice time than Slafkovsky did and finished the year with a goal and assist in eight games, while averaging 8:29 of ice time.
Whether on teams still in the throes of a rebuild or ones vying to qualify for the postseason, the top prospects from the 2022 Draft struggled to find roles in NHL lineups. As Fantilli’s father Giuliano told us in March, “You’d be pretty arrogant to think that he’s walking straight into the NHL at eighteen years old” and “We’re not in any rush for him to go to the NHL. If it’s right for him, then it’s right for him. If it’s right for him to go back to school, he’ll go back to school.” The NHL’s allure is undeniable, but there are more than few advantages to sticking around the NCAA for one more year.
If Fantilli does opt to try his luck in the professional ranks next year, Michigan should still be a legitimate title contender. However, if Fantilli does return to avenge another national semifinal loss, Michigan will be a title favorite. It’s a thin line, but a significant one, and it’s resolution will be the story of the offseason for the Wolverines.
Jacob Truscott and Optimism Toward ‘23-24
We close this week with something that I intend to make a recurring segment as we progress through the offseason: Reasons for Excitement about the ‘23-24 season. This being our first bite at that apple, there are myriad options to choose from, but I’ll start with rising senior defenseman Jacob Truscott.
When last we saw Truscott, he was scoring a late January overtime game-winner against Minnesota. He’d been hit high earlier in the game but was able to continue; however, further examination revealed a season-ending wrist injury. Looking ahead to next year, Marshall Warren joins the Wolverines to add solidity and experience to Michigan’s blue line, but Truscott will almost certainly be that unit’s leader.
“He’s been unbelievable—Trusc,” said Brandon Naurato of the defenseman before Michigan left for Tampa and the Frozen Four. “He’s such a leader. He’s in every power play meeting; he’s in every PK meeting; he’s watching when Billy Muckalt watches video with the D…He’s still trying to be as ingrained as he can in the team without being on the ice.
“He asked me yesterday if he could get dressed and just be on the ice for practice tomorrow—just to be with the guys. But I think his whole point is knowing what’s going on with the team, what the messaging is at this time of the year, he’s in the loop, and he can preach that same message. He’s almost like an extension of the coaching staff—he’s been breaking down his own video. We miss him, and he’s been super dialed. Everything that he can do while being out, he’s gone far above that.” That glowing description of Truscott as a leader suggests that the Port Huron native may well upgrade last year’s “A” to a “C” come October.
Of course, fixating on Truscott’s leadership gifts runs the risk of ignoring how well he played on the ice this season. As a junior, Truscott retained the steadiness and defensive reliability he showed as an underclassmen while demonstrating confidence and creativity in the offensive zone that he had yet to show at the collegiate level. It was as if he learned to deploy the passing and skating tools we’d seen him use so well in his own end in the offensive zone.
So much of Truscott’s recruiting class has graduated to the pros by now—Power, Matty Beniers, Kent Johnson, Erik Portillo, and Thomas Bordeleau, but Truscott remains. There persists a (slim) chance he signs with the Vancouver Canucks this offseason, but, if he doesn’t, Jacob Truscott will be poised for a huge senior season in Ann Arbor.
Thank you for reading Gulo Gulo Hockey! Thank you also to Michigan Athletics, from whom this week’s preview image is lifted. You can support our work further by subscribing or by visiting https://ko-fi.com/gulogulohockey.