Hi, i'm a Bruins fans and i want to know something. I read a lot of people talking about Raycroft and the playoffs saying he hasn't prove anything yet in the playoffs and saying that could be a flaw in the Bruins game. While it is true he hasn't prove anything in the playoffs, he hasn't been given the chance to prove anything YET. But don't worry, he isn't any Dafoe...
The question i have to ask is: Do you think Théodore proved something in the playoffs?
He won by himself the last two games against the Bruins but the first four games of the Bruins series and the last 3 against Carolina he was horrible. He also finished over 3.00gaa in those playoffs if i remember correctly.
So, how can the people who question Raycroft hability to play like he has in the regular season because he is a rookie give a free pass to Théo while his playoff record is not as good as you can think it is when you hear people talk about him?
Granted Raycroft didn't prove anything (in fact he didn't have the chance yet...) but Théo proved he can be excellent or very bad... If that is a proven playoff goalie, than who isn't?
Hi, i'm a Bruins fans and i want to know something. I read a lot of people talking about Raycroft and the playoffs saying he hasn't prove anything yet in the playoffs and saying that could be a flaw in the Bruins game. While it is true he hasn't prove anything in the playoffs, he hasn't been given the chance to prove anything YET. But don't worry, he isn't any Dafoe...
The question i have to ask is: Do you think Théodore proved something in the playoffs?
He won by himself the last two games against the Bruins but the first four games of the Bruins series and the last 3 against Carolina he was horrible. He also finished over 3.00gaa in those playoffs if i remember correctly.
So, how can the people who question Raycroft hability to play like he has in the regular season because he is a rookie give a free pass to Théo while his playoff record is not as good as you can think it is when you hear people talk about him?
Granted Raycroft didn't prove anything (in fact he didn't have the chance yet...) but Théo proved he can be excellent or very bad... If that is a proven playoff goalie, than who isn't?
Discuss.
I don't think it's worth discussing, as ll it would do is start an insult thread. There CAN'T be any comparison between Theo and Raycroft about the playoff at this point in time
If you're a Boston fan, you should know by now that Theo is a Montréal Canadien, therefore making him a small, good for nothing smurf, who only wins when the referees give undeserved penalties to the Bruins.
I'm sure this topic will bring you more enjoyment when discussed on the Bruins' board.
Hi, i'm a Bruins fans and i want to know something. I read a lot of people talking about Raycroft and the playoffs saying he hasn't prove anything yet in the playoffs and saying that could be a flaw in the Bruins game. While it is true he hasn't prove anything in the playoffs, he hasn't been given the chance to prove anything YET. But don't worry, he isn't any Dafoe...
The question i have to ask is: Do you think Théodore proved something in the playoffs?
He won by himself the last two games against the Bruins but the first four games of the Bruins series and the last 3 against Carolina he was horrible. He also finished over 3.00gaa in those playoffs if i remember correctly.
So, how can the people who question Raycroft hability to play like he has in the regular season because he is a rookie give a free pass to Théo while his playoff record is not as good as you can think it is when you hear people talk about him?
Granted Raycroft didn't prove anything (in fact he didn't have the chance yet...) but Théo proved he can be excellent or very bad... If that is a proven playoff goalie, than who isn't?
Discuss.
Theodore has more playoff experience and is a better all around goalie. I don't think the argument should go beyond this point. You can't compare a proven goalie to a rookie that just arrived in the league. That being said, Raycroft seems to be the real deal, but better players have proven to be flops in the postseason. Theodore has the edge as of now, but who knows what would happen in a playoff series. That's what is so exciting about the whole thing. Still, i'd pick Théodore over Raycroft any day of the week.
I agree that Theo looked nervous in the playoffs that year, but it was his first time, so it's understandable. I doubt Theo will be as nervous this time around because he has matured greatly these past two seasons. Raycroft on the other hand is exactly where Theo was two years ago, so who knows how he'll react to the added pressure. Everyone has to have a first time...
Hi, i'm a Bruins fans and i want to know something. I read a lot of people talking about Raycroft and the playoffs saying he hasn't prove anything yet in the playoffs and saying that could be a flaw in the Bruins game. While it is true he hasn't prove anything in the playoffs, he hasn't been given the chance to prove anything YET. But don't worry, he isn't any Dafoe....
Hmmm.....have to agree that Raycroft hasn't proven anything in the playoffs yet, but that is more because he hasn't been given the chance. Those who see him as a weakness, imo, are more hoping than basing it on anything. This 'proven himself in the playoffs' crap is way overrated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean_Jacket41
The question i have to ask is: Do you think Théodore proved something in the playoffs?
He won by himself the last two games against the Bruins but the first four games of the Bruins series and the last 3 against Carolina he was horrible. He also finished over 3.00gaa in those playoffs if i remember correctly.....
I think Theodore has proven that he can elevate his game to the highest level. The question is will he? The playoffs of two years ago, Theodore played well. I don't see how he can be blamed for the Carolina losses. The team fell apart from the head coach down to the last player in game 4. His numbers look bad also because of the inflated number from the last game (and the second last one as well), when the team quit, and left Theo out to dry. He was great the first three games of the series.
Overall, Theodore has proven alot more than Raycroft. Does that mean Raycroft is a weakness going into the playoffs...NO. But to state Raycroft is as proven of a goalie as Theo is, imo, ridiculous.
Theodore has played consitently all season. He went through hell last season and this summer and this has made him mature into a solid goalie. His positioning is more solid than it was 2 years ago, his mind is more solid too. He'll play more consitently this playoffs then he did two years ago.
Rayrcroft I can't comment on... he's a good goalie, but I'll wait and see how he does in his first game before I draw any conclusions. But if he doesnt do well you could always go with Potvin.. :lol
Well actually, Potvin plays pretty well against the habs too... :mad: this series won't depend as much on the goalies' performances, since both teams are pretty solid there. It'll come down to:
- Shutting down the Thorton line
- Shutting down Montreal's offense (Zednik, Koivu, RYDER, Ribeiro)
- Sheldon Souray vs. Joe Thorton ... who will win the battle this time?
- The habs smaller defense being able to handle the Bruins' big forwards.
Im still not sold on Theo to be honest. One good playoff round just doesnt cut it for me. In a sense i agree with the Bruin fan above. If Theo can elevate his game this year in the playoffs, then maybe i will become more of a believer.
I agree that Theo looked nervous in the playoffs that year, but it was his first time, so it's understandable. I doubt Theo will be as nervous this time around because he has matured greatly these past two seasons. Raycroft on the other hand is exactly where Theo was two years ago, so who knows how he'll react to the added pressure. Everyone has to have a first time...
That sums up my thoughts as well. What happened in his career and personal life in the last 2 seasons I beleive have made him that much stronger mentally and mature. I do not see him collapsing during the playoffs for one second.
:lol 
