You do not, under any circumstances, have to hand it to the Vancouver Canucks.
On Tuesday night against the Montreal Canadiens, the Canucks entered the third period down 3-0. They scored twice in the third, coming agonizingly close to their first third-period comeback of the season. Alas and alack, they鈥檙e still the only team in the NHL without one.
Still, it鈥檚 hard to credit the Canucks too much for the near comeback because they got outshot in the third period by the Canadiens and they didn鈥檛 create much in the way of legitimate scoring chances, with both of their goals coming on long shots from the point. Their second goal to make it 3-2 came on their third shot of the period, 11 minutes in.
The goals came on very nice shots, to be clear, but three shots in 11 minutes is not typically a recipe for a comeback.
To the Canucks鈥� credit, they did create some quality scoring chances in this game and probably deserved a better fate. Dakota Joshua hit a post on one chance on top of the crease and came a millimeter away from getting the puck across the line on another chance. Either one of those goes in and this game is headed to overtime.
But that鈥檚 the problem: the Canucks need bounces to go their way just to score three goals in a game. Scoring four goals seems like an outlandish fantasy. You might as well pretend that the Canucks are satyrs, dryads, and talking animals. I imagine that Nils H枚glander would be, like Jannik Hansen, a honey badger.
Still, we鈥檙e supposed to believe that there鈥檚 some moral victory in the Canucks coming close to tying the game.
鈥淲e did make the comeback, we had some goal-mouth scrambles,鈥� said head coach Rick Tocchet. 鈥淕uys tried. I鈥檝e got to give them a lot of credit.鈥�
If only trying hard was enough to get a team to the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Instead, the loss leaves them a point behind the Calgary Flames for the last Wild Card spot in the Western Conference, having played one more game than the Flames.
That heightens the importance of Wednesday鈥檚 match-up against the Flames, where the Canucks will be playing on the second night of back-to-backs against a rested team in Calgary.
The Canucks will have to do more than try on Wednesday night. , do or do not, there is no try. They did not when I watched this game.
- The Canadiens got off to a quick start, scoring a minute into the game. Brock Boeser turned the puck over in the offensive zone, and Nick Suzuki scampered up the ice to take a Cole Caufield pass in on a partial break. While Marcus Pettersson did well to get his stick around Suzuki for a stick lift without taking a penalty, Suzuki did even better to get his stick back down and beat Kevin Lankinen with a lovely deke to the backhand.
- That put the Canucks behind the eight ball early and it got even worse when a Juraj Slafkovsky shot from a bad angle fooled Lankinen. It looked like a bad goal to give up but, in his defence, Tyler Myers reached in and appeared to deflect the shot right as it was coming off Slafkovsky鈥檚 stick, which made it very difficult to read, even for . That's a shot that uses words like "lugubrious."
- It could have been a very different game if Dakota Joshua hadn鈥檛 hit the post 30 seconds before Slafkovsky鈥檚 goal. Joshua won a battle down low against Mike Matheson and curled to the front of the net with a backhand wraparound, but he just couldn鈥檛 hook the puck in, clanking it off the post instead. Someone needs to invent a hockey stick that somehow curves both ways for these types of situations.
- Joshua hit another post a few minutes later, only it was on his own net. The puck went up in the air on a scramble around the Canucks鈥� crease and Joshua went up to bat the puck away, only for Joshua Roy to hit his hand at the same time, causing Joshua to send the puck off the post. A Canadien was the next to touch the puck and the refs ruled it was a hand pass, but the replay in the arena, which wasn鈥檛 shown on TV, seemed to show the puck went off Joshua鈥檚 glove. If it had gone in the net, it might have been ruled a good goal.
- A few minutes after that, Joshua came agonizingly close to putting the puck in the net for a third time 鈥� this time, the right net. Conor Garland鈥檚 centring pass tipped off Arber Xhekaj鈥檚 stick, forcing Sam Montembeault to make the save, then Joshua jammed at the rebound but Montembeault got his pad across to keep the puck out. Or did he? The officials actually reviewed the play during the next TV timeout, giving the Canucks a little bit of false hope.
- From the overhead view, you can see that just the tiniest sliver of the puck was touching the goal line. Unfortunately, a tiny sliver is enough. Some argued from the front view that you could see white between the puck and the goal line, but that鈥檚 just a trick of perspective. Don鈥檛 be fooled by such things, or you鈥檒l be no better than the people who don鈥檛 understand how the mirror .
- The Canadiens extended the lead on a pair of Canucks mistakes. Joshua went for a line change with the Canadiens controlling the puck, and Slafkovsky chipped the puck past a pinching Tyler Myers for a 2-on-1. Lankinen had to respect Suzuki鈥檚 shot, so had no chance when he instead slipped the puck under Marcus Pettersson鈥檚 stick to Cole Caufield for an open net. It was a breakdown so brutal, it belonged .
- 鈥淒ak shouldn鈥檛 have changed and Mysie shouldn鈥檛 have pinched,鈥� said Tocchet. 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 change on that play and when he left the middle of the ice to go off the ice, that left the middle open, that means the D鈥檚 can鈥檛 pinch 鈥� you have to play the dots. Couple of mistakes there and if you give Caufield and Suzuki time, that鈥檚 what happens.鈥�
- The Canadiens got a goal from each member of their top line, in stark contrast to the Canucks鈥� offensive struggles from their top forwards. It鈥檚 giving Homer Simpson yelling, 鈥淲hy doesn鈥檛 mine look like that?鈥� at .
- 鈥淲e didn鈥檛 have an answer for their top line,鈥� said Tocchet. The thing is, they did: Elias Pettersson. When Pettersson was matched up head-to-head with Suzuki鈥檚 line at 5-on-5, the Canucks out-attempted the Canadiens 8-to-2 and out-shot them 4-to-1. It鈥檚 just that the one shot from the Canadiens, off the Boeser turnover, went in the net. If Tocchet had hard-matched the Pettersson line against Suzuki, there might have been a different outcome.
- He didn鈥檛 get a point, but Nils H枚glander was instrumental in the Canucks getting on the board in the third period. He made a nifty bank pass off the boards to himself to exit the Canucks鈥� zone, then beat feet through the neutral zone to set up Pius Suter for a shot attempt. After the Canadiens cleared the puck, H枚glander sent Suter in again for another zone entry with possession. Like that took place from approximately 1760 to 1840, it was an industrious shift.
- 鈥淓specially the last month, his effort鈥檚 really high,鈥� said Tocchet of H枚glander. 鈥淗e鈥檚 trying. He鈥檚 not worried about the first 40 games. You can tell that he鈥檚 trying to make his second half mean something, so I鈥檝e got to give him a lot of credit, he鈥檚 working hard.鈥�
- H枚glander didn鈥檛 get an assist on the Canucks鈥� first goal, however, because the puck was knocked off his stick. It went right to Marcus Pettersson, who set up Filip Hronek at the point. His shot found iron but, unlike Joshua鈥檚 earlier chance, Hronek鈥檚 went off the post and in.
- The Canucks got the benefit of a bad penalty call midway through the third period. Hronek hit Pius Suter in the knee with a shot and Suter collapsed in agony. The referee seemed to think David Savard had viciously slashed him to cause that agony, perhaps because of Suter鈥檚 delayed reaction. It鈥檚 like his brain was so focused on shooting the loose puck that he let his pain receptors go to voicemail, only checking his messages after missing the puck and realizing, 鈥淥h! That hurt!鈥�
- Up until that point, the Canucks鈥� power play had been dreadful, but they suddenly after the bad call. Pettersson got his feet moving, first switching from the left side to the right, then rotating up to the top of the zone to create a double-layered screen of Canadiens penalty killers before firing a wrist shot that beat Montembeault cleanly past the blocker.
- 鈥淚t sure helped when I won the draw,鈥� said Pettersson when I asked what changed on that power play. 鈥淲e could set up a play right away.鈥�
- It's worth noting that Pettersson went 2-for-3 on faceoffs on the power play in this game. He's beating himself up over one lost draw.
- The Canucks couldn鈥檛 complete the comeback. Their best chance came off a deflected Pettersson shot that created a scrum in front of the net but Jake DeBrusk couldn鈥檛 jam home the rebound, allowing Matheson to sweep the puck out of the crease with his glove. As Don Taylor often says, that was as close as they would come.
- 鈥淭he six-on-five, we had two plays that were right there and we鈥檙e not seeing them,鈥� said Tocchet. 鈥淭here鈥檚 two plays there, if we executed, somebody would have a great chance. It鈥檚 unfortunate, because I really thought we were going to score there.鈥�
- The Canadiens sealed the game away with an empty net goal. Hronek missed Garland with a pass and the puck came to Matheson, who launched it into the net from the defensive zone. Pettersson dove out and got a piece of the puck with his stick but not enough to knock it down or wide of the net. 4-2, game over, warm up the bus.
- Elias Pettersson finished with a minus-2 on the night, which felt absurd. At even-strength, which includes the empty-net situation, the Canucks outshot the Canadiens 15-to-2 with Pettersson on the ice. None of the Canucks鈥� 15 shots went in; both of the Canadiens鈥� two shots went in.
- That was the one sour note on Pettersson鈥檚 stat sheet. He had four shots on goal, went 13-and-6 on faceoffs, was dominant in puck possession, and scored a power play goal. On Tuesday night, .
- As the Canucks head to Calgary, the one bright spot is that Quinn Hughes will travel with the team, with Tocchet saying, 鈥淕ood possibility he could be in.鈥� The Canucks could really use their captain right now.
