HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Washington Capitals
Notices

Pens vs Caps. 7pm. Verizon Center. 12.1.2011

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-02-2011, 05:33 PM
  #826
bonzaibondra12
Registered User
 
bonzaibondra12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 1,874
vCash: 500
This team was a lot better at many things last night. No fast breaks, incredible in the dot, the most physical we have been in awhile . We do the same to the Sens, this team will pot some goals and get its confidence back.

The lines need to be balanced better. The second line sucks. That is on our GM not BB or DH.

bonzaibondra12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 06:24 PM
  #827
Dirtbag59
Registered User
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonzaibondra12 View Post
This team was a lot better at many things last night. No fast breaks, incredible in the dot, the most physical we have been in awhile . We do the same to the Sens, this team will pot some goals and get its confidence back.

The lines need to be balanced better. The second line sucks. That is on our GM not BB or DH.
I agree. Luckily they have Knuble working with the second line in practice today which means that the 4th line will get it's playmaker back and allow Eakin or MP to face bottom line pairs more often rather then 1st or 2nd pairs. I think the opening night forward lines were the best combo's by far, why anyone messed with them is beyond me.

Still I have to admit I kind of liked Hunter's tweaks to the lines midgame with the rotating RW on the first line. A far cry from Boudreau violently shaking up the lines with no two players besides Nick and Alex having the same linemates.

Dirtbag59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 06:32 PM
  #828
ChibiPooky
Moderator
Caps/Avs/Bills fan
 
ChibiPooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Fairfax, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,168
vCash: 50
This isn't really the place for this, but... did anyone think after Luke Adam's first goal, "Wow that looked exactly like Evander Kane's goal"

ChibiPooky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 06:32 PM
  #829
Capsman
Registered User
 
Capsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrwarden View Post
Certain people on this board thought that Bruce was the problem on this team. Countless times we heard how if you simply removed the moron, even an average coach would be able to make this team's play countless times better. Literally, we were told, Bruce was the cause of all of the team's problems, and every symptom of bad play was attributed to his lousy coaching.

He's been removed.

Now we're hearing something along the lines of "It's impossible for a coach to come in a change things overnight and start winning."

Nevermind that Bruce did it. Hitchcock's doing it. Lemaire did it. And the excuse we're hearing is that Bruce messed them up too much.

A team that still had a better record at it's worst under Bruce than anything St. Louis had experienced in years.

It's ok, I get it. You have marginalized Bruce's outstanding record with the Caps to being pure talent, and ignore the difference in results between him and Hanlon as being Hanlon, somehow, being much worse than the moron you make Bruce out to be. But if it turned out the coach after Bruce also couldn't match his results, the levels of cognitive dissonance in your heads would probably cause them to explode.

Bruce's message might have gotten stale. I think he could have turned it around but I have no problem with the firing. I do think that Dale was a bad choice, but time will obviously tell on that one.

So my point: That the notion that Bruce is somehow a bad coach be laughed at as it's deserved to be laughed at since it was first implied.
I really hope you think for a moment about the absurdity of your argument. For every example you give there is an example of the new coach needing some time to get things in order. The reason? Every situation is different. I never ever said this was the perfect team and that the players bear no responsibility. Certainly the student bears some responsibility for poor grades even if the teacher is lousy, but a good teacher sure as hell helps to get the most out of a student.

The most telling thing to me is that the Caps lost 4 playoffs in just about 4 different ways. The Pens' forechecking, the Canadiens keeping everything to the outside, the Lighning trapping...every team was one step ahead of us, no matter the roster tweaks.

As I said, I am already seeing much smarter hockey in a lot of ways by the Caps under Hunter. Again I point to the dump ins which are much better than I've seen from BB's Caps. We are mixing up dump ins around the boards with soft ones to the corners and our guys are getting to them by and large. Furthermore, let me pose this question. Supposing DH is sacrificing a few wins now for the greater good. What did BB's immediate turnaround do for us in the long run besides garner fan support. That's great and served its purpose at the time. I appreciate that. But supposing Hitchcock's Blues falter in the long run and we go farther in the playoffs than ever. Do you then argue the same way?

My point is give it time.

Capsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 06:39 PM
  #830
pgreene
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,950
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrwarden View Post
Certain people on this board thought that Bruce was the problem on this team. Countless times we heard how if you simply removed the moron, even an average coach would be able to make this team's play countless times better. Literally, we were told, Bruce was the cause of all of the team's problems, and every symptom of bad play was attributed to his lousy coaching.

He's been removed.

Now we're hearing something along the lines of "It's impossible for a coach to come in a change things overnight and start winning."

Nevermind that Bruce did it. Hitchcock's doing it. Lemaire did it. And the excuse we're hearing is that Bruce messed them up too much.

A team that still had a better record at it's worst under Bruce than anything St. Louis had experienced in years.

It's ok, I get it. You have marginalized Bruce's outstanding record with the Caps to being pure talent, and ignore the difference in results between him and Hanlon as being Hanlon, somehow, being much worse than the moron you make Bruce out to be. But if it turned out the coach after Bruce also couldn't match his results, the levels of cognitive dissonance in your heads would probably cause them to explode.

Bruce's message might have gotten stale. I think he could have turned it around but I have no problem with the firing. I do think that Dale was a bad choice, but time will obviously tell on that one.

So my point: That the notion that Bruce is somehow a bad coach be laughed at as it's deserved to be laughed at since it was first implied.
hooray for this post. two thumbs up. i laughed, i cried. it's better than cats.

double standards are a ***** people, and they should not and cannot be tolerated in civilized society. or on internet message boards.

pgreene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 07:04 PM
  #831
ALLCAPSALLTHETIME
Registered User
 
ALLCAPSALLTHETIME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,020
vCash: 500
For those with selective memories, Bruce was 3-3-1 in his first 7 games with the Caps. I believe he was 5-4-1 in his first ten.

ALLCAPSALLTHETIME is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 07:06 PM
  #832
Dirtbag59
Registered User
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALLCAPSALLTHETIME View Post
For those with selective memories, Bruce was 3-3-1 in his first 7 games with the Caps. I believe he was 5-4-1 in his first ten.
I guess people only remember that first game when they think of Bruce's transition.

Dirtbag59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 07:08 PM
  #833
ALLCAPSALLTHETIME
Registered User
 
ALLCAPSALLTHETIME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtbag59 View Post
I guess people only remember that first game when they think of Bruce's transition.
Of course. It's like old people grousing about the weather and saying, "It never used to be like this, by gar!"

ALLCAPSALLTHETIME is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 07:09 PM
  #834
RandyHolt
Opposite George = GM
 
RandyHolt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: Poland
Posts: 24,360
vCash: 50


I dont think its been proven that Bruce was or wasn't THE problem.

It hasnt been a week, maybe I missed something, but I didn't know the jury had reached a verdict. I wasnt expecting them to reach a decision before playoff time.

RandyHolt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 07:13 PM
  #835
pgreene
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,950
vCash: 500
he won the first two.

pgreene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 07:20 PM
  #836
Dirtbag59
Registered User
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgreene View Post
he won the first two.
Then proceeded to loose 4 of 6 playoff series

Dirtbag59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 07:36 PM
  #837
Capsman
Registered User
 
Capsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALLCAPSALLTHETIME View Post
For those with selective memories, Bruce was 3-3-1 in his first 7 games with the Caps. I believe he was 5-4-1 in his first ten.
That's a good point, but I think the important thing here is the short term performance does not necessarily predict the ending. Even impatient me took 1 year to see that we were in trouble with Bruce.

Capsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 07:41 PM
  #838
RandyHolt
Opposite George = GM
 
RandyHolt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: Poland
Posts: 24,360
vCash: 50
The ironic thing is, the bigger "the" problem that Bruce was, the longer it will take for Dale to right the ship. The longer it takes Dale, the more the Bruce or busts will proclaim that see, Bruce wasn't THE problem. That's a real pickle, huh. Saying you wanted Bruce fired, yet defending him, is ironic in itself. Your defense will fall on deaf ears, as the BB case is closed. An appeal will be granted when the playoffs are over.

RandyHolt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 08:10 PM
  #839
pgreene
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,950
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyHolt View Post
The ironic thing is, the bigger "the" problem that Bruce was, the longer it will take for Dale to right the ship. The longer it takes Dale, the more the Bruce or busts will proclaim that see, Bruce wasn't THE problem. That's a real pickle, huh. Saying you wanted Bruce fired, yet defending him, is ironic in itself. Your defense will fall on deaf ears, as the BB case is closed. An appeal will be granted when the playoffs are over.
there are those who predicted getting rid of bruce would turn it around in a day. overnight even. you might know some of them.

pgreene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 08:44 PM
  #840
Capsman
Registered User
 
Capsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgreene View Post
there are those who predicted getting rid of bruce would turn it around in a day. overnight even. you might know some of them.
Who said that? I defy you to find 2 people.

Capsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 08:49 PM
  #841
pgreene
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,950
vCash: 500
well, since you asked so nicely:

"The biggest thing Bruce did to turn our season around, was to not be Glen Hanlon. A different voice. He didnt install some complex system that required weeks or months to implement. He had success starting in his frst game. Proof positive that a simple coaching change can have a profound effect on a team. A different perspective. Sure, Hanlon was a fool which made Bruce or anyone else that replaced him, look like an even greater genius. "

"Coaching changes often result in a win. Did the players learn to play overnight? No, they are just responding to a different voice. Its only hockey."

(to be fair, that's the same person twice).
(i actually found about three more--had the post queued up and decided it wasn't worth it. don't feel like going back to find them now).

pgreene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2011, 09:04 PM
  #842
Langway
Moderator
Intangibles
 
Langway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,692
vCash: 500
Coaches that achieve immediate success are either liberators or preach a system easily digested by the players. Boudreau brought both and Hunter arguably brings neither. He's perhaps a liberator in the sense that he seeks to add much needed structure to their game but that requires a universal commitment and focus level that I'm not sure this bunch is fully prepared to bring. His lack of NHL coaching experience also undermines that authority under the circumstances to a certain extent.

Langway is offline   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 01:25 PM.

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.