Ducks must reclaim offensive identity. Game 2 demands relentless pressure and decisive play from the opening puck drop to challenge the Oilers.
The Anaheim Ducks lost their first playoff game in eight years in somewhat devastating fashion. As has been typical, they fell behind by a couple of goals in the first period and battled back to take a 3-2 lead into the third period.
Like the veteran, unflappable team that the Edmonton Oilers are, they adjusted and stormed back with a goal halfway through the third, followed by another one with two minutes left when it seemed like the game was heading to overtime.
The Oilers took game 1of the series by a score of 4-3, but there were several aspects Anaheim could build upon, along with areas that’ll need some fine-tuning if they’re to make a series out of this.
Here are some adjustments they will need to make in game 2 and moving forward:
Stick to Your Identity
For the majority of the season, the Ducks have been one of the most unpredictable, volatile, yet fun teams in recent memory. Their ability to score goals at will came attached to a willingness to pressure and activate for offense in all three zones.
That priority to possess pucks through heavy pressure came at a cost this season, however. In learning a new system and playing to their offensive strengths, they sacrificed on the defensive end of the spectrum and were forced to outscore their problems or rely on their goaltenders significantly to win hockey games this season.
As the playoffs drew nearer, the significant mistakes were minimized to a degree, but were still present. Playoff hockey is notoriously tighter, and details become more influential. In an attempt to eliminate said costly mistakes in game 1, the Ducks’ first period was a clear effort to play a safer brand of hockey.
In that first period of game 1, Anaheim made smart advancements with pucks, were conservative with their pressures, and defensemen were hesitant to activate, a sizable feature to their offense generation this season.
“I feel like we kind of dipped our toe in and were just kind of waiting to see what was going to happen,” Killorn said. “It’s kind of been the case with our team all year. Once we go down, I think we feel a little bit more comfortable, which is weird. Once we went down, I felt like we were just a little bit looser and felt like we could make some plays.”
Following the first intermission and after giving up the first two goals of the hockey game, Anaheim reverted to the brand of hockey that made them so successful. They pressured puck carriers into turnovers, flew weak-side teammates, and were aggressive with their pinches on outlets.
The first ten to fifteen minutes of the game, where the Ducks played over-cautiously, proved costly, as they couldn’t weather Edmonton’s offensive storm playing that way. They’ll need to make a more concerted effort to dictate game flow from the opening puck drop in Game 2.
Heavier F1
An aspect of the Ducks game in 2025-26 that’s been spotty has been the effectiveness of their forecheck. They prefer to maintain possession as they advance pucks up ice rather than settle for stretch passes, high flips, tip-ins, or dump-ins deep into the opponent’s end in order to establish a forecheck.
Though it’s not their preferred brand, when they are forced to play that way, the Ducks can mount steady and efficient forechecks where they cause turnovers deep in the offensive zone or disrupt breakout attempts before counterattacking after a change of possession.
The Oilers’ forward group is as deep, diligent, and dangerous as it gets in the NHL. However, their defense corps, when pressured properly, can be forced into turnovers in precarious situations on the ice.
With questionable puck-retrievers on the blueline and a goaltender not known for playing pucks proficiently behind his net, that could provide the Ducks an exploitable facet within their opponent in Game 2 and beyond.
Draw Opposing F1 Low
Early in Game 1, it was clear that part of the Oilers’ game plan involved laying a hit on Ducks defenseman Jackson LaCombe every time he touched the puck. As the game progressed, LaCombe and the defensemen adjusted to Edmonton’s mandate for a high-pressure F1.
LaCombe would draw said forechecker, either using his momentum against him or drawing him out of position so he could move pucks to his open outlets, slip an incoming hit, or join a rush.
For the Ducks to best utilize their top defenseman, it would benefit them to continue using Edmonton’s desire to be physical with LaCombe against them.
If the Ducks can build on the aspects of their game that were successful in Game 1, while making some slight tweaks to their approach and deficiencies, they would have a good chance of heading back to Anaheim with this series tied at one game apiece.