Mike Knuble: Goat No Longer

Let us sacrifice more goats, I say.

(But not Goat.)

Mike Knuble had, by my count, at least three quality scoring chances in tight on Henrik Lundqvist just in Tuesday night’s first period, and as all of them went unlit and uncelebrated you had this sense that it just wasn’t going to be his night. Again. He hadn’t scored since opening night in Atlanta way back on October 8. Then a pagan priest in skates named Ovi slid a puck out front in the slot in period number two, Knuble banged it home, and the hockey gods surrendered their torment of the Caps’ right wing. Joe B during his call for Versus last night noted that a good many of Knuble’s 29 goals last season came in the season’s second half.

  • This game was appreciably more physical than Sunday’s with Philadelphia. It was a Tuesday night tilt in November, and yet there was plenty of mutual hatred in place. Just like you might imagine there ought to be between old Patrick division rivals. It doesn’t matter how early in the season they play, or what circumstances have otherwise influenced the teams’ general standing, the matchup is intrinsically ire-laden. It is so beautiful to behold. And so tragic we can’t more often. (Thanks, commish.)
  • Mike Green’s four-game goal scoring streak ended, and I was one who believed that had he gotten one by Lunqvist last night the remainder of the week set up well for a run at his record of goals in eight straight games. Oh, well. He’s playing terrific hockey, and he’s a key catalyst for the Caps’ attack. He also acquited himself rather well in his slow dance with Brandon Dubinsky. This is a fiestier Mike Green we’re seeing this season, and we like it.
  • More goats, more donkeys, too, I say: Brooks Laich, on his lunchpail tally in tight to draw the caps even at 1 in the first frame: “Any donkey can go to the front of the net and stand there with his stick on the ice.” In point of fact, Laich’s redirection of Alex Semin’s superb feed was anything but a gimme. Laich’s three points Tuesday night helped push him into the top of the league in plus-minus, at +13.
  • If I were Bruce Boudreau, I’d have given the night’s hard hat to Matt Bradley. I’d probably give it to him 50 percent of the time given that he is probably the hardest worker on the team night in, night out, but Tuesday night he earned it, I’d submit, because he set up the game-winner with Nick Backstrom’s patience and skill but in a grinder’s body. And on his other shifts he did a lot of dirty work for good measure.
  • Already trailing 1-0, the Caps went short-handed for a too many men on the ice infraction, and seconds later Mike Green took a hooking penalty. The Rangers had about 1:40 of 5-on-3 attack, but Jeff Schultz authored perhaps he best penalty killing shift of the season for all of the 100 seconds. Regularly he got down low on the ice to expand his reach and clog passing lanes immediately in front of Michal Neuvirth. The Rangers didn’t bring much puck pressure to that attack, but Sarge was large at a pivotal moment in the early going.
  • You lie if you claim you didn’t do a double-take on John Erskine’s left-point howitzer blast past Lundqvist’s shoulder. Had to have been the most impressive tally of his life, all things considered. What a beauty. But mere seconds later Tyler Sloan produced a squelching of the joy-buzz with his ill-advised, shockingly aggressive pinch attempt deep in the Blueshirts’ end. That type of uber aggressive play simply has to be made in this league — even against an opponent’s fourth line. Better would be backing off and not allowing a Neanderthal like the Boogie Man to plod down the wing unchecked and smash a slapper past your helpless goalie.
  • Defensive blunders on both sides of the ice, one by Karl Alzner on the second goal with a careless clear and Sloaner’s piss-poor pinch, are blunders of inexperience in the faster paced NHL. On the whole the Caps’ blueline has been more disciplined this season, but they also have been susceptible to miscues on some of the simplest plays. Alzner’s unforced error on Brian Boyle’s second goal was a perfect example. But I’m not sure Alzner should be singled out for a struggle of an evening. Gabby gave him more than 20 minutes of ice, and I’m one who doesn’t read a great deal into weird events transpiring on MSG ice — annually one of the worst sheets in the league. The puck was bouncing all over the place last night.
  • Sean Avery was a conspicuously silent presence Tuesday evening, not getting involved all that much. That may have been where New York went wrong. Avery’s dynamic pest style normally gets Ovi and co. riled up and distracted. If Avery isn’t being a pest odds are he isn’t helping his team much.
  • Referee Don Van Massenhoven was perfectly positioned for Dan Girardi’s attempt on Brooks Laich’s life in the end boards behind Lundqvist in the second period, and yet did nothing. The trailing referee — trailing outside the Rangers’ zone — made the call. How does Van Massenhoven miss that? Laich was lucky not to leave the ice on a stretcher. Van Massenhoven shouldn’t work again until the new year. Disgraceful.
Advertisements
This entry was posted in Alexander Ovechkin, Brooks Laich, Incompetent officiating, Joe Beninati, John Erskine, Karl Alzner, Mike Green, Mike Knuble, Morning cup-a-joe, National Hockey League, New York Rangers, The Great Old Patrick Division, Washington Capitals. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Mike Knuble: Goat No Longer

  1. sonja says:

    That shove into the boards looked remarkably similar to the move that earned Ovechkin a two game suspension and large fine (not to mention the disgrace and hurting it’s put on his game to this day). Funny how Girardi only got 2 measly minutes …

  2. That’s an interesting comparison, Sonja. With Ovi’s hit on Brian Campbell last season in Chicago, you could make the case that he genuinely was guilty of charging as well as boarding, whereas with Girardi last night, I think it was a case merely of a brutal boarding. But in both cases we watched defenseless players crumple to the ice, in frightening fashion. And if we’ve learned anything from the jurisprudence of Colin Campbell, since Laich apparently wasn’t hurt last night, expect nothing to come of it from the league office.

  3. TG says:

    I’m giving Alzner a pass on his gaffe last night. You could see that he was looking up hoping to hit whoever was coming out of the penalty box (I think Green) with a lead/breakaway pass. Didn’t look down to see that the puck had moved on him. Nice thought about what to do though after a clean faceoff win with 1 second left in a penalty.

  4. meg says:

    I don’t know if you can use that logic (if the player isn’t injured no suspension) on hits against brooks laich. He’s pretty much indestructible, you have to shoot him in the eye with a puck to take him out and even then I’m sure he’d play if he didn’t need to see. It’s a really stupid way to evaluate suspensions on anyone, but with brooks laich its just impossible.

  5. Geo says:

    Uh oh. This SI.com article on the game uses the dreaded “P-word” 😀
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/hockey/nhl/?eref=sinav

  6. sonja says:

    I’m with Meg on this … and not because Laich is indestructible, but because outcome based punishment is just stupid. There’s really no other place in our society that uses this model … except the NHL. We don’t give drunk drivers a pass when they don’t hurt anyone … they still get their licenses suspended. And if they also injure someone, there are additional penalties. You can’t know what is in someone’s head (especially in a fast moving game like hockey) and hand out penalties based on “intent to injure” … Girardi threw Laich into the boards using virtually the same motion that Ovechkin used last year on (?? the name escapes me now). The only difference is that Girardi is smaller than Ovi and doesn’t have the same speed, power or momentum that Ovechkin had … so the question becomes why should Ovechkin be penalized for his size and strength?

  7. OvieTracker says:

    I agree with SONJA and MEG. Outcome based punishment is unfair and stupid. It introduces too much subjectivity into evaluating the ACTION based on a) the injured player’s fragility or indestructibility and b) the penalized player’s size and strength. This criteria makes no sense to me.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s