HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Stanley Cup Finals Game 4 Vancouver @ Boston

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-10-2011, 03:04 AM
  #401
almostjesus*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 562
vCash: 500
I know I will get flamed for this.

As much as I despise the Bruins..I have to cheer for them.

Living in Vancouver I have too many trashtalking friends that bad mouth the Habs and jump on and off a bandwagon more than any team I know.

For this -- If I must cheer for one..it will have to be the bruins.

It's a lose-lose either way for me

almostjesus* is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 03:10 AM
  #402
S Bah
Registered User
 
S Bah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: victoria bc
Country: Wales
Posts: 6,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by almostjesus View Post
I know I will get flamed for this.

As much as I despise the Bruins..I have to cheer for them.

Living in Vancouver I have too many trashtalking friends that bad mouth the Habs and jump on and off a bandwagon more than any team I know.

For this -- If I must cheer for one..it will have to be the bruins.

It's a lose-lose either way for me
Well you may get crucified yet with that kind of thinking,are you Canadian?

S Bah is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 03:21 AM
  #403
CrazyShea
Registered User
 
CrazyShea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The Rock
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by almostjesus View Post
I know I will get flamed for this.

As much as I despise the Bruins..I have to cheer for them.

Living in Vancouver I have too many trashtalking friends that bad mouth the Habs and jump on and off a bandwagon more than any team I know.

For this -- If I must cheer for one..it will have to be the bruins.

It's a lose-lose either way for me
Your not a habs fan if you think the bruins winning is a loss i dont care. Selfish

CrazyShea is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 05:10 AM
  #404
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I'm not saying the Bruins are a bad hockey club, but they aren't elite. They're definitely a playoff club, and they are good enough to win the Cup if all the pieces fall into place (seriously, three straight goaltender meltdowns? Really?).

But let's face reality here. Nevermind the Habs series. Boston got badly outplayed by Tampa Bay. The difference-maker was all goaltending, and by that I mean Roloson being bad rather than Thomas being great, though both happened.

(And yes, I think the Habs, beat-up as they were, were better than them. I think it was at least close. And I don't think the Habs are elite either.)

This doesn't devalue their success -- any Cup winner has things falling into place for them and you only play what's in front of you -- but it does impact analysis of their true strength.

It's not like something like this is unprecedented. Carolina won the Cup in 2006 and weren't exactly an elite team; all the pieces fell in for them (Koivu injured, Martin injured, the entire Sabres D injured, and the Oilers Cinderella'ing their way through the tougher Western conference). They were good enough and the pieces fell into place. Heck, Carolina was probably weaker than Boston: they missed the playoff outright both years before and both years after their Cup. I don't think Boston will miss the playoffs next year, but falling back to 6th or so would not surprise me.

Although I'm wondering if I shouldn't revise my opinion of the Western conference in general and the Canucks specifically. I don't think the idea that the Bruins aren't the best team in the East is TOO controversial, and the West is supposed to be the much stronger conference. I would've expected the Canucks to control the play more because, no matter if you think that the Bruins "opportunism" is sustainable, puck possession and controlling the play is clearly not one of their strengths. Hard to do when your goalie isn't making the saves, maybe, but sheesh, Vancouver should be able to at least do something vaguely resembling what Tampa did, right?
You keep repeating this 3 straight goalie meltdown BS. Over the last 2 games the Canucks have 1 goal. You think there poor goal tending has cost them the games? That deserves a big .

All this proves, is that despite facing evidence to suggest your stats aren't the be all end all you'll continue to try and justify them.

Luongo has not been the problem, the Bruins and Timmy Thomas have been the problem. You can keep spewing non sense about a bunch of stats you're obviously weighing too heavily into your thought process, but teams aren't normally lucky all year and all playoffs. To put it simply, you're wrong.

habsjunkie2* is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 05:19 AM
  #405
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Let me get this straight, they pulled one of the biggest choke jobs last year, they almost lost in the first round this year despite one team missing key playerS, they almost pulled another choke in the ECF, were twice, just a goal away from being eliminated, were down 0-2 in the Finals, and apparently that's a sign of being a great team?
Were Carolina and Edmonton great teams when they met in the Finals?
The Bruins are a good team, but not great. They haven't dominated Vancouver, at all. That is a very simplistic view based solely on the score. Luongo gave up 4 goals yesterday that had no business going in. If goals are going to go in so easily, then it'll be another 2 wins for Boston. But that is considering Thomas keeps playing on his head. The guy comes out a mile away from his net, has no idea where the puck is, but somehow makes the saves and gets lucky on the rebounds. People comparing his style to Hasek, but one of them actually knew where the puck was. Thomas looks lost most of the times, but hey, gotta give him credit, he makes the save.
That said, it's like people saying we were a great team last POs. We heavily depended on Halak and Cammy. The rest was a collective effort to shut the opponents, and although it worked the first two rounds, we probably get swept in the 1st round without Halak.
Same can be said of the Bruins this year, although a little better than what we were.
This post has no basis in reality. Another one relying a little too much on luck to justify something they don't understand. Just maybe Tim Thomas will win his 2nd vezina in 3 years because he's one hell of a goalie. Vancouver was also 1 goal in game 7 from being eliminated.

The good teams are strong in face of adversity. It's what makes them great.

I also believe styles create nightmares for certain clubs and our style was a problem for the B's, it doesn't mean we would of beat all the teams they beat too. It's a ridiculous assertion. Everything is talked about based on what if's and mythical garbage around here.

I equal it to all those who somehow manage to put Orr, Lemieux ahead of Wayne Gretzky based on what could of been and had this certain scenario happened ect ect. The truth is, Gretzky did all these things they talk about, but for some reason they don't count. lol. Same with the B's here.

I'm not saying it's over and the B's will win the cup, but they've already proven 10 fold that they not only belong, but can easily beat the canucks. Those blaming Luongo are funny, you'll lose every game you don't score in, and tbh I don't find Timmy has had to do all that much. He sees everything and the B's don't give up many second chances. The small Canucks forwards are having difficulty generating anything.

habsjunkie2* is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 05:23 AM
  #406
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Bruins didn't win the first two games because Vancouver were better. The only reason it's tied 2-2 is due to Luongo.
Vancouver were in the same spot vs Chicago. No reason to doubt or worry.
Yep he should of scored a couple more goals in games 3 and 4. The only reason it's tied 2-2 is become of the B's and Tim Thomas, Luongo has no blame in this. I don't know if you can get this or not, but the Canucks only have 1 goal in those games, that kinda blows the Luongo is at fault story out of the water, don't ya think?

habsjunkie2* is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 05:27 AM
  #407
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Whenever I read "timely goals" and "timely saves" as a team strength, I'm reminded of the Habs' playoff run last year, and I hear voices in my head saying "lucky" and "they won't be able to keep this up".

I think some people are seeing the Bruins and letting the end result cloud their view of the process of how it happened.
Even after being faced with a sampling of 100 games you still don't get it. Oh well, keep reading your meaningless stats and think you have the inside track.

habsjunkie2* is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 06:45 AM
  #408
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
Even after being faced with a sampling of 100 games you still don't get it. Oh well, keep reading your meaningless stats and think you have the inside track.
100 games isn't the massive sample you seem to think it is, nor does it have the consistency you implicitly assume it does.

MathMan is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 06:48 AM
  #409
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
Luongo has not been the problem, the Bruins and Timmy Thomas have been the problem.
Yes, Luongo hasn't been the problem. The Canucks are going to win if Luongo's save percentage stays at .750.

MathMan is offline  
Old
06-10-2011, 06:49 AM
  #410
Perrah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
Yep he should of scored a couple more goals in games 3 and 4. The only reason it's tied 2-2 is become of the B's and Tim Thomas, Luongo has no blame in this. I don't know if you can get this or not, but the Canucks only have 1 goal in those games, that kinda blows the Luongo is at fault story out of the water, don't ya think?
Yeah Luongo hasnt been why they lost but I think that game may be coming he looks shattered in there. On the peverly goal in game 4 he looked like he deked himself by going down too early and thinking he might drag it cross crease but the 3rd and 4th goals were nothing he could do so cant blame him. I didnt think ballard would be that bad to be honest but he was brutal.

I think the canucks have to start slashing the **** out of the bruins in the defensive end like the bruins are doing to them. I dont think Henrik sedin can touch the puck without getting slashed on his obvious bad leg may as well lay the wood to them too and start hammering lucic on his bad foot.

Perrah is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:13 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.