Canucks 5, Sharks 4 (SO): The Most Satisfying Game Ever Lost

After Joe Pavelski was stuffed by Cory Schneider, rendering Alex Burrows' previous goal the lone score of the shootout and the game winner, Sharks TV color commentator, Drew Remenda, said that he doesn't believe in "moral victories," but that this came close. Radio broadcaster Jamie Baker disagreed, calling the thrilling game a "moral victory."

While the two respectable men disagreed, they both failed to hit on a key point: under current NHL rules, losses of value (or moral victories) do exist. The Sharks left HP Pavilion tonight with an overtime loss, but if they had failed to comeback just once (they did three times), they would have 84 points right now instead of 85.

Not only does this bring a very intriguing element of the NHL's current scoring system to the forefront (which I'll get to later on), but it also, indisputably, makes this game a loss of value. However, the Sharks now have seven "losses of value" this season, and not all can be seen as "moral victories."

On both November 17th and 18th, the Sharks blew two goal leads in the third period. In both games, their opponents (the Avs and Stars, respectively) completed their comebacks and sunk the Sharks in OT. Blowing a two goal lead late in the third, as they did in Colorado, is certainly deflating.  Not leaving that game with two points was undoubtedly frustrating. Blowing another two goal lead the next night and leaving Dallas with another mere point was simply aggravating.

When you lose OT games in that fashion, you feel as if you've lost a point—not gained one.

Tonight, the Sharks were down 2-0 after the Canucks dominated the first period, but a quick comeback in the first 2:04 of the second made it a new game. Devin Setoguchi scored in typical Seto "work hard, get rewarded" fashion, following his own forehand off the post with a backhand in the net. Ryane Clowe struck a minute later, making a power move to the net and slipping one under Schneider.

However, the Canucks had the last say of the period, going into the break up 3-2 and entering the third with the lead (they were 30-0-3 in these situations).

One would think that those gaudy numbers, as well as the fact that the Canucks had the last goal of the second, would give them the advantage in the third. But therein lies what is special about these Sharks, and why, in this case, the Sharks can relish their one point.

The Canucks' success with third period leads is not simply due to their mental toughness. It's due to their insane forward depth that allows them to keep their shifts short and balanced. It's due to their puck-moving defensemen who put the puck deep in their opponents zone.  It's due to a devastating forecheck that keeps the puck deep and often expands the Canuck lead, and it's due to an 86 percent penalty kill that knocks the wind out of opponents who are thinking "this power play is our chance to come back."

What the Sharks have done throughout the last two months has been remarkable, and the number one quality this team has displayed is mental toughness. They've comeback countless times, recovered from blown leads, finished in OT, and followed up losses with winning streaks. But while mental toughness, coupled with the Sharks talent, can beat most teams, Vancouver's fool-proof closing strategy and top-tier personnel won't go down like that.

So what did San Jose do? They were aggressive, establishing sustained attacks early in the third and forcing desperate clears. This didn't allow Vancouver to get the puck deep, get in on the forecheck. and rhythmically rotate their lines. They didn't press for a goal; fearing that each attack could be their best and last. They played their game, which stumbled Vancouver.  As the Canucks spent more and more time defending, and less and less changing lines and forechecking, they began to tire. As a result, the Sharks' attacks became increasingly more and more effective and, finally, they were rewarded.

Speed demon Torrey Mitchell can out-skate almost anyone, but he isn't the craftiest puck-handler and can rarely beat a well-positioned defender. However, the exhausted Canucks could not handle Mitchell's speed, and he skated through four defenders—all failing to disrupt him. He finished at the goal mouth, wristing one through Schneider to tie the game with 2:13 left.

After a terrible high-sticking call to Douglas Murray, the Canucks reminded the Sharks of yet another reason they are so hard to beat: they capitalize on breaks their way, and they have the league's best power play. Daniel Sedin deflected one home right away.  With 1:48 left, the Sharks were down yet again and all momentum appeared to be on Vancouver's bench.

But the Sharks passed the heart test with flying colors, working hard to defend their empty net.  But it was a subtle mental battle between Joe Thornton and Alex Burrows that turned the game once more. Vancouver closes out games because, rather than sitting back and defending, they are aggressive with the lead. Thornton, being the only thing between Burrows, the puck, and an empty net, baited Burrows with his stick. Burrows wanted to beat the slower Thornton to that puck and ice the game, so he grabbed Joe's stick. The refs saw it, and the Sharks went on the power play.

True to their game, the Canucks PK was aggressive. But the Sharks, up against it with only 35 seconds left and an empty net, matched Vancouver's aggression. Quick tape-to-tape passing got the puck behind the Canuck defense, and Jumbo Joe made yet another great play—one-touching the puck to the stick of Ryane Clowe so fast that Schneider could not physically stop the ensuing shot from #29. With 20 seconds left, the Sharks tied it for a third time.

San Jose dominated the OT, outshooting Vancouver 9-0. Schneider stood tall though, and Vancouver took the extra point in the shootout. Needless to say, this did not deflate the Sharks.

Coming back from down two against the NHL's best playing-with-the-lead team is tough. Coming back a second time is truly impressive.  Doing it a third time, after everyone thought it was finally over, is incredible. The Sharks not only displayed their toughness once again, but they proved (for a second straight time) that they can wear down the Canucks, and that their relentless physicality is as tough for Vancouver as Vancouver's relentless speed is for the rest of the league.

These may be the top two teams in the West, and anyone who still thinks a playoff meeting between the two is an easy call is less than educated on the matter. The Sharks wore the Canucks out and dominated that OT, and there are no bailout shootouts in May.

While all of this is reason enough for Drew Remenda to get off of his high horse and admit this game was a "moral victory," the fact remains that the Sharks work and statement was met with a quantifiable reward—they got a point. Which brings me to a point of my own, and I'll keep it very brief.

For all the criticism of the three point game (teams play for overtime, it rewards losses, it cheapens wins, it distorts standings), there is something wonderful about it. Drew Remenda said that he is "a firm believer that there are no moral victories in sports," and I agree. When my team loses, no matter how valiantly, it hurts all the same. What the NHL has done, is given a fan of all sports one, modest way to take the sting out of losing—by creating the possibility for a true moral victory.

And for everyone who thinks this system only cheapens the pureness of winning and losing, rest assured: I've watched hundreds of hockey games, and this is the first moral victory I've seen.

Source: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/632604-canucks-5-sharks-4-so-the-most-satisfying-game-ever-lost

Anaheim Ducks Dallas Los Angeles Kings Phoenix Coyotes San Jose Sharks New Jersey Devil