HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Now that Boston has advanced to the final...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-28-2011, 10:58 AM
  #51
Watsatheo
Error 503 Service
 
Watsatheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,108
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTL-rules View Post
Absolutely no correlation whatsoever... hell why not say that we had a cup winnig team with Koivu in the year Carolina won it ?

Please people, be realistic.
The difference though was the Canes recked us after Koivu was taken out. Wasn't even close.

Watsatheo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 11:01 AM
  #52
Ross MacLochness
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Watsatheo View Post
The difference though was the Canes recked us after Koivu was taken out. Wasn't even close.
Are you thinking of '02 when the wheels fell off? Cause in '06 every game Carolina won was by 1 goal, and two of them were in Overtime. And one of the non overtime games was 1-1 in the 3rd until Carolina scored on a 5-on-3 after Markov shot the puck over the glass.

Ross MacLochness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 11:06 AM
  #53
Watsatheo
Error 503 Service
 
Watsatheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,108
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross MacLochness View Post
Are you thinking of '02 when the wheels fell off? Cause in '06 every game Carolina won was by 1 goal, and two of them were in Overtime. And one of the non overtime games was 1-1 in the 3rd until Carolina scored on a 5-on-3 after Markov shot the puck over the glass.
Yeah I think you're right, I'm confusing the series.

Watsatheo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 11:22 AM
  #54
24stanleycups*
24-6=18,goodluck lol
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 564
vCash: 500
Excuses for why we lost this year are pointless, but reasons why we will beat them next year are hopeful. Max Pacioretty was our most proficient scorer. He would have had 31 goals in an 82 game season, and that's only at the age of 23. Josh Gorges is our best shutdown d-man, and has his best years ahead of him. And what can I say about Andrei Markov. The guy has been our best player for years. His offensive skills on the PP are second to almost none and he just simply knows how to play hockey. You had an even more mature PK subban to the mix and a couple of depth forwards and we're a contender next year. A serious, serious contender.

24stanleycups* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 11:23 AM
  #55
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 17,621
vCash: 500

Et le But is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 11:31 AM
  #56
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genghis Keon View Post
You're right, but you sure like to frame things in a negative light. You always talk about flexibility and having cap space to improve, but when we have a potential stud on the blueline who's already been the backend's go-to-guy down the stretch and in two playoffs, and a whole lot of cap space opening up (11 million just with two players), you consider it a "huge question mark" instead of an opportunity. Sure, it's a question mark, but if you want flexibility and cap space to make changes, one would think it's the kind of question mark you'd be thrilled about: you have the cash to make a run at anyone you want, you can restructure the D as you like it, you can bring back guys you want, you can use stop gaps to make use of the money at a later date.
yes, I certainly do tend to have a more pessimistic or critical view of things...

that said, wether one choose to view things through rose-coloured glasses or not, i think it's absolutely fair to say that there is a big question mark when looking to next season.

We have cap space, but we have some serious holes to fill on defense. I believe Markov and Gorges will be re-signed, but until they do, their spots are vacant... i remember back in 09 where so many people where so sure that Komi would be re-signed, and those same people who were most certain tended to be the same who were most disgusted with him for taking more money with a rival.

None of us can accurately predict what will come of this summer, I'm not suggesting that the moves that we'll make will be bad ones, in fact I'm hoping and praying that we "hit a homerun" this offseason when it comes to re-building our defense and managing our roster/cap situation, but with so many question marks, it's not a guarantee that the roster heading into training camp will be markedly improved over last season.

is that really such a pessimistic or negative perception to have?

Miller Time is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 11:45 AM
  #57
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
Revisionist history at best.

Hope you understand that we were leading 3-1 in game 4, and we played like garbage. It's not the bruins who played amazing, we played like garbage from here on out. And Price definitely didn't do his part there either. There's no way we should have lost that game. Leading 1-0, 3-1, 4-3 and managed to lose ? C'mon. Was that really the bruins playing like the bruins suddenly ?

Or wait, was it when they scored 2 goals quick in game 3, and we dominated the rest of the game, and if it had not been for Price's retarded gimme, that one was going to OT with us having all the momentum ?

Or wait, was it when the bruins won their last 3 games in OT ? Against our insanely depleted squad ?

Please.

Not only did the seas part (east was so weak) for this insanely lucky team, but... it took them everything to beat the weak injured teams they faced showing everyone they were no better than the team they did beat.
And that's revisionist to. Point is they have been able to beat us with NO PP success whatsoever. We DOMINATED them? Yeah, 1 period here, 1 other period there, but not during 3 freakin consecutive periods within the same game which always was the same problem we had all year. So scoring 2 quick goals means nothing?

Strange that what applies to us doesn't apply to others. Remember when some, including myself, said that Halak himself changed the course of the playoffs last year? Well some were saying that it wasn't true, that the number of shots didn't indicate the real story and all....Isn't it then possible that Thomas, while good, didn't need to be THAT great? Did we always finished with 40 good scoring chances against 7 in all the games? We were not consistant enough, the Bruins played great defensively mostly on the road. Yet, it did came down to 1 goal.

But they were the overall better team. Whether it's for great goalie performance..whether it's the timely and clutch goals....whether it's the overall defensive performance, I see it as Boston taking us for granted during the first 2 games....And then, if some agree that we dominated after while we losing, tough to think that we were that bad...how can you dominated while being bad?

Yes, it's always more than one team being great, the other team being bad. Tons of outside factors coming in. We were without players and lately, it seems we always are so either we need to find a way to deal with it, either we have to see why it's always happening.

Everything is revisionist at this point. Just depends now what part of the "revision" you want to see it. Surely, you can badmouth them after our series and mention how weak they are but then...they beat the Flyers. We would have beat the Flyers in 4? And now they beat the Lightning...They are the Eastern Champions. Problem is that there were A LOT of people saying how lucky we were in 1993 and I HATED that. So I choose to apply it even if it's about my enemy now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
The 1993 team was a million times better than the bruins squad this year.

D
Desjardins, Schneider, Daigneault, Odelein, Brisebois, Haller
G
Roy

Compare that to the ruins joke of a defense. It would be one thing if Chara was on top of his game, but he's a shadow of himself. I'm sure he's got something pretty bad afflicting him.

Then up front we had Damphousse who was better than anyone on the bruins offense. Muller was still pretty good back then, probably either of their center's equal. '93 playoffs Leclair >>> Lucic.

And despite that team being better, they still needed a lot of luck and the seas parting I agree. But Bruins it goes beyond that. Two game 7s. Habs back then rolled their opponent despite the wins in OT. They won the cup tying the record for least losses in 4 rounds I believe.

Hell, bruins are the first team to ever win a playoffs series without scoring one PP goal. Heck they even got scored once while on the PP. They're ****ing abysmal. And if we had been any good at all we'd have taken advantage of that 2-0 lead to beat them. But game 4 was a killer with the squandered leads after squandered leads. Sad.
Quebec, Buffalo, NYIsles and LA Kings. No matter how good you think we were, we finished with 102 points. Pretty good record that made us the 6th best team in regular season. Thing is, we played against teams that had respective records of 104, 86, 87 and 88 points. Compared to Boston right now who finishied with 103 points. And faced teams with 96, 106, 103 and now 117 points. So no matter how good we were, we were only tested during the 1st round. Boston will be tested during the 4 rounds. A really bad team loses at one point. Yes, a bad team can win 1 round...maybe 2...but 3? If they win the Cup....will they still be bad?

It's always a little bit of everything. You usually need more than just to be good...you need your opponent to be worst....but then are you actually playing so that the opponent looks bad? Or are they just playing bad by themselves?

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 11:58 AM
  #58
LesCanadiens
Registered User
 
LesCanadiens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Okanagan Baby!
Posts: 2,822
vCash: 500
We competed better or even with them in all departments except one, goal. CP was OK. But Thomas was great.

Considering we were missing a few very key players, I think we did admirably. The refs and linesmen also helped them with 2 of the game winning goals (high stick pass and offside).

So it was really close and the Bruins had the bounces on their side this time.

LesCanadiens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:04 PM
  #59
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,961
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CrAzYNiNe
BORING! Who cares if the Bs are in the SCF, doesn't mean if we beat them we would be there.

I think we have a team that can compete, and if the players all play up to their potential (ya I know this is impossible) we would probably dominate. Imagine Gomez scoring a point per game (7 mil players need to be damn close to that), Pouillot not being invisible. I can go on and on, but at this point our D was a let down this year in the playoffs, definitely due to the injuries, but that's hockey.

Here's to more celebrations in 11-12

CrAzYNiNe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:14 PM
  #60
Genghis Keon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
yes, I certainly do tend to have a more pessimistic or critical view of things...

that said, wether one choose to view things through rose-coloured glasses or not, i think it's absolutely fair to say that there is a big question mark when looking to next season.

We have cap space, but we have some serious holes to fill on defense. I believe Markov and Gorges will be re-signed, but until they do, their spots are vacant... i remember back in 09 where so many people where so sure that Komi would be re-signed, and those same people who were most certain tended to be the same who were most disgusted with him for taking more money with a rival.

None of us can accurately predict what will come of this summer, I'm not suggesting that the moves that we'll make will be bad ones, in fact I'm hoping and praying that we "hit a homerun" this offseason when it comes to re-building our defense and managing our roster/cap situation, but with so many question marks, it's not a guarantee that the roster heading into training camp will be markedly improved over last season.

is that really such a pessimistic or negative perception to have?
It's fine, but I think that speaks more to your belief in management than the current situation. Maybe I'm wrong, but I never got the feeling you were enamored with our D-corps. Right now, we have our young building block who's already played at a #1 level, an old expiring contract, and a boatload of cash. Our free agents claim to want to come back or otherwise have strong ties to the city (Markov being here his whole career, getting Canadian citizenship, etc.). Management aside, we're in a situation where we have nothing but options. So if you really liked our D, we have the option to bring the core back (and Hamrlik's not going to get 5.5 from anyone; with his injuries, it's unlikely Markov is getting anymore than he is now, if that; and the cap went up; so there's more room for growth moving forward). If you didn't like them, we have the cash to change.

It seems to me it's the kind of situation you want the team to be in. From what you post, you don't like the team's cap management (with regards to how it impacts flexibility and growth moving forward), and now they have a chance to rework the entire d-corps. This is real life, not a video game, so even with the reincarnation of Sam Pollock things wouldn't work out perfectly, but from what you write, it really seems like a situation you'd want.

Genghis Keon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:15 PM
  #61
pine
Registered User
 
pine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,879
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by LesCanadiens View Post
We competed better or even with them in all departments except one, goal. CP was OK. But Thomas was great.

Considering we were missing a few very key players, I think we did admirably. The refs and linesmen also helped them with 2 of the game winning goals (high stick pass and offside).

So it was really close and the Bruins had the bounces on their side this time.
CP was "okay".

Thanks for the lulz.

pine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:17 PM
  #62
ThaDevilGirl
Registered User
 
ThaDevilGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: YFC/YUL
Country: Portugal
Posts: 9,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFpineapple View Post
CP was "okay".

Thanks for the lulz.
Carey Price didn't score any goals

ThaDevilGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:17 PM
  #63
Mathradio
Go Roy Munson!
 
Mathradio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBuriedHab View Post
The parity in the league is ridiculous. We can hang with any team, just like the other 15 teams that made the playoffs. I was only truely scared of a healthy flyers team in the east. All the other teams I thought we could take. This team has some solid pieces in place going forward. If we are healthy next year who knows what we can do.
And maybe a healthy, consistent Washington too...

Mathradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:18 PM
  #64
onemorecup*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MM425 View Post
Is it fair to conclude in retrospect that we've got a pretty solid core of players that are capable of making it to the final?

Our team was severely depleated throughout the series and we still managed to force it to game 7 OT. I think you can objectively say that we gave Boston their toughest series in the East despite the fact we were missing several key players. With a bit of luck and a healthy squad, it could have just as easily been us in the finals this year...

It certainly represents a lot of hope for the next couple of years, IMO.
not a chance ....we dont have the horses to make the final

I will repeat it till the cows come home ....WE CANT COMPETE 5 ON 5 in the playoffs

thats our problem.... even this year you takle away the pp and we cant generate a scoring chance

give me a break bro ...we dont have a Lucic...Horton....Chara ....

we dont even have a Marchand ...Sidenberg.....in our lineup

our bottom 6 cant compete with a Downie...Bergenheim...and Moore

plus the bruins have a Seguin....Spooner...Knight ...plus another top 10 this year

we are a middle of the pack team unles Price ...PK...Eller...Leblanc and Max become legit wayaabove average players

because if we think...Cammy..Gio...Gomez...Pleks ...and Kosty are going to do it for us ....we need to stop smoking the weed folks

onemorecup* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:19 PM
  #65
The n00b King
Kingin' since 2003
 
The n00b King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by yohan1212 View Post
Guess you missed game 2 when Seguin single handidly won the game with a 4 point night.... In all honesty Boston's lineup against the bolts was much better than what played the Habs. Seguin in for Thornton is a HUGE upgrade...
that was the only game Seguin did anything at all. He was a total no show after that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by geeman View Post
not a chance ....we dont have the horses to make the final

I will repeat it till the cows come home ....WE CANT COMPETE 5 ON 5 in the playoffs

thats our problem.... even this year you takle away the pp and we cant generate a scoring chance

give me a break bro ...we dont have a Lucic...Horton....Chara ....

we dont even have a Marchand ...Sidenberg.....in our lineup

our bottom 6 cant compete with a Downie...Bergenheim...and Moore

plus the bruins have a Seguin....Spooner...Knight ...plus another top 10 this year

we are a middle of the pack team unles Price ...PK...Eller...Leblanc and Max become legit wayaabove average players

because if we think...Cammy..Gio...Gomez...Pleks ...and Kosty are going to do it for us ....we need to stop smoking the weed folks
Did you miss the part where Cammy had 10 pts in the first round TEN POINTS! The guy is a scoring machine in the playoffs. Gio also really stepped up. It's guys like AK and Gomez who were no shows. And the fact that we had a crippled D, our bottom six does kind of suck, I agree with you. Moen is but a shadow of his Duck days.

But we have Shultz in the system, and that guy, I think, will be key in the coming years.

Now if we can get a guy like Laich...we're really starting to talk. I dont think that the habs need that much top 6 talent, because I firmly believe it is there. But they do need wingers that can do the dirty work, go into corners, win battles (board battles have been the bane of the habs last season...it was maddening how weak they were in those).

I dont think the habs are a Kowalchuk player away, I think they are just a couple sandpaper players away from being a top contender.

The n00b King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:22 PM
  #66
Bill McNeal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,296
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by LesCanadiens View Post
We competed better or even with them in all departments except one, goal. CP was OK. But Thomas was great.

Considering we were missing a few very key players, I think we did admirably. The refs and linesmen also helped them with 2 of the game winning goals (high stick pass and offside).

So it was really close and the Bruins had the bounces on their side this time.
I'm not sure how anybody who watched the series could think Price was merely OK. Especially if they thought Thomas "great".

Faced more shots than Thomas, had a lower GAA, a higher save %, wasn't criticized for his erratic play like Thomas was, lost 3 of his 4 games in OT where it's basically a coin toss.

Bill McNeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:25 PM
  #67
Drive425
Registered User
 
Drive425's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: St Louis Du Haha
Country: Malta
Posts: 1,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LesCanadiens View Post
We competed better or even with them in all departments except one, goal. CP was OK. But Thomas was great.
Considering we were missing a few very key players, I think we did admirably. The refs and linesmen also helped them with 2 of the game winning goals (high stick pass and offside).

So it was really close and the Bruins had the bounces on their side this time.
I think all the posters saying Price was average or worse need to go and watch that series again. Seriously people, It was down to Thomas vs Price pretty much every game. Price made incredible saves and so did Thomas. We lost the series, period end of discussion. It doesn't matter that the refs missed calls or the Bruins got lucky or the Habs had some of their best players missing. Nothing is going to change the outcome and blaming that outcome on Price is just wrong.

Drive425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:25 PM
  #68
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,305
vCash: 500
http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=33288743&postcount=3

oh man the bruins board is gold mine.

[b]"I take Lucic and Horton over the Sedins any day"[b]


I hope they get majorly swept in 4.

uiCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:26 PM
  #69
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
And that's revisionist to. Point is they have been able to beat us with NO PP success whatsoever. We DOMINATED them? Yeah, 1 period here, 1 other period there, but not during 3 freakin consecutive periods within the same game which always was the same problem we had all year. So scoring 2 quick goals means nothing?

Strange that what applies to us doesn't apply to others. Remember when some, including myself, said that Halak himself changed the course of the playoffs last year? Well some were saying that it wasn't true, that the number of shots didn't indicate the real story and all....Isn't it then possible that Thomas, while good, didn't need to be THAT great? Did we always finished with 40 good scoring chances against 7 in all the games? We were not consistant enough, the Bruins played great defensively mostly on the road. Yet, it did came down to 1 goal.
I wasn't saying that. Don't really care what others were saying. Last year we won on Halak's back for the most part. We got owned by better teams but won by luck and great goaltending. The same was done to us this year.

Quote:
But they were the overall better team. Whether it's for great goalie performance..whether it's the timely and clutch goals....whether it's the overall defensive performance, I see it as Boston taking us for granted during the first 2 games....And then, if some agree that we dominated after while we losing, tough to think that we were that bad...how can you dominated while being bad?
When one team wins in 7, and wins most of their game by 1 goal, that means anything could have happened. The bruins won in OT in game 7. It can't be any more roll of the dice than that. It doesn't mean they were the better team. The best team doesn't always win.

I hate it when results dictate opinion this much.

They got a million lucky bounces in OT and won 3 games that way. Does that really mean they were better ? I disagree. At best they were about our equals.

Quote:
Yes, it's always more than one team being great, the other team being bad. Tons of outside factors coming in. We were without players and lately, it seems we always are so either we need to find a way to deal with it, either we have to see why it's always happening.
Not a big fan of the injury excuse either. Even discounting injuries, bruins are still lucky to be where they are. One of the worst team to make the SCF in the last 20 years. Better than Edmonton, Florida. On par with Anaheim (the one with Keith Carney, etc) and Calgary probably. Gotta be able to see past the results sometimes. The year Florida made the finals, they weren't the 2nd best team. Just like Boston isn't the 2nd best team in the league.

Quote:
Everything is revisionist at this point. Just depends now what part of the "revision" you want to see it. Surely, you can badmouth them after our series and mention how weak they are but then...they beat the Flyers. We would have beat the Flyers in 4? And now they beat the Lightning...They are the Eastern Champions. Problem is that there were A LOT of people saying how lucky we were in 1993 and I HATED that. So I choose to apply it even if it's about my enemy now.
Pronger is the flyers. And their goaltenders were struggling big time. And everything is a question of match ups. They definitely deserved the flyers series. But it was probably closer than the 4-0 sweep indicates.


Quote:
Quebec, Buffalo, NYIsles and LA Kings. No matter how good you think we were, we finished with 102 points. Pretty good record that made us the 6th best team in regular season. Thing is, we played against teams that had respective records of 104, 86, 87 and 88 points. Compared to Boston right now who finishied with 103 points. And faced teams with 96, 106, 103 and now 117 points. So no matter how good we were, we were only tested during the 1st round. Boston will be tested during the 4 rounds. A really bad team loses at one point. Yes, a bad team can win 1 round...maybe 2...but 3? If they win the Cup....will they still be bad?
Hope you realize point totals don't mean anything if you compare eras before loser points and SOs.

Quote:
It's always a little bit of everything. You usually need more than just to be good...you need your opponent to be worst....but then are you actually playing so that the opponent looks bad? Or are they just playing bad by themselves?
Honestly, the seas parted for the bruins. The east is weaker than it's ever been and they have had an insane amount of luck to get where they are. Bounces, good match ups, key injuries on the other side.. and despite everything going their way, it took them 7 games twice to beat their opponent. If you think the bruins are a good team, good for you. I really don't. They're an extremely average team and aren't a SC finalist team in a normal year. Vancouver will slaughter them, and it will be fun to watch.

E = CH² is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:33 PM
  #70
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
Hope you realize point totals don't mean anything if you compare eras before loser points and SOs.
I used points not to talk about the gap but to talk about how still much weaker they were compared to other oppositions we could have met. Matter of fact all of those teams were not amongst the top teams in the league. We finished 6th, we had to beat only 1 team with more or equivalent points than us. Boston will have to do it to 3 teams to win the Cup. Points might not say it all but it has to mean something as far as the quality of the teams.

And yes it's often about the matchup....reason why I remember being EXTREMELY glad to see LA beat Toronto 'cause geez I didn't like our chances with the Leafs....

As far as your last point, not that we owe anything to them, but what will be people opinion if the Bruins beat Vancouver? Aside from that knife you'll have to remove from your heart....will people be acknowledging Boston if they do?

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:36 PM
  #71
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drive425 View Post
I think all the posters saying Price was average or worse need to go and watch that series again. Seriously people, It was down to Thomas vs Price pretty much every game. Price made incredible saves and so did Thomas. We lost the series, period end of discussion. It doesn't matter that the refs missed calls or the Bruins got lucky or the Habs had some of their best players missing. Nothing is going to change the outcome and blaming that outcome on Price is just wrong.
He was solid to great in game 1-2-5-6-7. 5 games is pretty good.

However, Price (and the habs) dropped the ball in game 3-4 and let the bruins back in it.

Overall, Price isn't the reason we lost, but he could have been the reason we won with one good game out of game #3-4. Those were the key points of the series. Had we won one of these 2 games... and we're not even talking about Price stealing either of those game, just play solid.

But he did have 5 really good games. And if we had played better in game 4 it wouldn't have mattered. But whatever. He shares the blame for the loss with the rest of the team.

E = CH² is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:43 PM
  #72
Robert604strom
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 614
vCash: 500
Cheer for Vancouver.We will take em out for you guys. And with Montreal going 7 and the Hawks going 7 with the Canucks,i think it proves that the will of rivals is stronger than the skill of others.
And im Hopein Van gets Revenge for the Habs,my family is originally from Montreal,and my Uncle was on the Habs.

Robert604strom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:53 PM
  #73
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genghis Keon View Post
It's fine, but I think that speaks more to your belief in management than the current situation. Maybe I'm wrong, but I never got the feeling you were enamored with our D-corps. Right now, we have our young building block who's already played at a #1 level, an old expiring contract, and a boatload of cash. Our free agents claim to want to come back or otherwise have strong ties to the city (Markov being here his whole career, getting Canadian citizenship, etc.). Management aside, we're in a situation where we have nothing but options. So if you really liked our D, we have the option to bring the core back (and Hamrlik's not going to get 5.5 from anyone; with his injuries, it's unlikely Markov is getting anymore than he is now, if that; and the cap went up; so there's more room for growth moving forward). If you didn't like them, we have the cash to change.

It seems to me it's the kind of situation you want the team to be in. From what you post, you don't like the team's cap management (with regards to how it impacts flexibility and growth moving forward), and now they have a chance to rework the entire d-corps. This is real life, not a video game, so even with the reincarnation of Sam Pollock things wouldn't work out perfectly, but from what you write, it really seems like a situation you'd want.
that's pretty bang on.

i want to give PG the benefit of the doubt, so I remain cautiously optimistic about what he will do this summer, but memories of '09 make it hard to have a lot of faith.

Healthy, our defense from last season was pretty good. Gill and Hamrlik were both exposed by being forced into too many minutes, but as bottom-3 dmen, they were fine. Wiz brought some much needed scoring help after Markov went down, and Gorges showed continued development before he got hurt.

Markov-Subban-Gorges... healthy that's a very good top-3. Question is who do you bring in for the other top-4 spot. Wiz @ <4M$ is a good option, but if we commit to him for over 4M$, I think we'll end up regretting it. If he prices himself out of town, what UFA then becomes a reasonable target in the 3.5-4.5M$ range, and will we be able to land them?


the bottom pairing will be fine assuming we re-sign one of Gill/Hamrlik (I prefer Hamrlik), and let them split time with Weber/Emelin.

but that still leaves Spacek (who needs to be dealt, otherwise we end up with a badly overpaid bottom-pairing dman), and filling that 4 spot.


With Markov/Gorges coming back from major injury, you'd think there'd be more of an imperative to make sure that 4th dman is a quality all-around dman. Wiz is too weak defensively to be counted on to pick up the slack if injuries hit again, so imo finding an affordable upgrade for him, assuming Markov/Gorges are retained, is our biggest need.

PG will have to show a little more creativity and "balls" this summer if he's going to pull off improving the roster from opening day last year. More likely, I'm inclined to predict that he'll be content getting the incumbents re-signed, and banking on the continued improvement of players like subban, eller, weber, maxpac to provide the team with a higher level of play. Banking on youth is always a risky call, especially when your veterans are almost all highly inconsistent (or injury-prone)

Miller Time is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:55 PM
  #74
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
I used points not to talk about the gap but to talk about how still much weaker they were compared to other oppositions we could have met. Matter of fact all of those teams were not amongst the top teams in the league. We finished 6th, we had to beat only 1 team with more or equivalent points than us. Boston will have to do it to 3 teams to win the Cup. Points might not say it all but it has to mean something as far as the quality of the teams.
Also, the OTL and SO pts diminish that gap between teams. You will rarely ever see such huge gaps again. Teams don't even make the playoffs with 86 pts barring some sort of miracle (in last year's incredibly weak eastern conference you still needed 88 pts, a complete freak occurence). So it's not fair to use the point gap as some sort of proof of anything. There's more parity now. And the bruins aren't necessarily better than the teams they beat. Especially considering 2 of the 3 series ended in 7 games. Montreal had similar luck/bounces, but they really did take advantage whereas Boston, despite all the advantages stretched it to the limit. It will take more than the flawed point gap argument to convince me.

If you look at it more closely, you'll see they beat us. With pts adjustment from OTL/SO then we're probably similar to the 88 pts of old.

Then they beat Tampa who were like the nords we beat.

And they beat the flyers who honestly were in shambles. They had been struggling and trending downward for a long long time. Their goaltending was the worst I've seen in a while. Their best player was injured. And Thomas had to stand on his head during some of those games. But I'll give them credit for the flyers.

As for Vancouver, I'd be shocked if they beat them.


Quote:
As far as your last point, not that we owe anything to them, but what will be people opinion if the Bruins beat Vancouver? Aside from that knife you'll have to remove from your heart....will people be acknowledging Boston if they do?
I strongly doubt it happens, but if it does, it depends how they do it. If they win in 7, 4 times in OT, while getting blown out in their 3 losses, and win games 1-0 on the back of Thomas making ridiculous stick saves... and favorable reffing patterns (lol no call game 7 first time in 21 years, what a fortunate coincidence)... we'll see. One thing is I won't let the result dictate my opinion. The result by itself doesn't mean anything.

E = CH² is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 01:01 PM
  #75
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
He was solid to great in game 1-2-5-6-7. 5 games is pretty good.

However, Price (and the habs) dropped the ball in game 3-4 and let the bruins back in it.

Overall, Price isn't the reason we lost, but he could have been the reason we won with one good game out of game #3-4. Those were the key points of the series. Had we won one of these 2 games... and we're not even talking about Price stealing either of those game, just play solid.

But he did have 5 really good games. And if we had played better in game 4 it wouldn't have mattered. But whatever. He shares the blame for the loss with the rest of the team.
i think maybe you're expectations were/are a bit too high.

Price's playoff numbers put him 1st in save% and GAA among the starters.

I'm not a fan of relying on stats alone, but from a measurable pov, Price gave the habs better goaltending than any of the other teams in the playoffs.

Now of course, he let in a few bad goals, all goalies do, but imo he came back from each mistake and gave the team the kind of goaltending they needed to win.

Without Price, the habs aren't even in the series. Even in the games were he let in a bad goal (game 4 for example), he made so many clutch saves before and after the mistake that i think it's excessive nit-picking to call him out for the "one he should have had".

None of the final 4 teams got better goaltending in any of their series than the habs did through the first round. Give Price anyone of their rosters and he'd be getting ready for the finals instead of his next cattle roping adventure...

Miller Time is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:19 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.