Bruins 4 Habs 2 : Do we have a series again?
by Kevin van Steendelaar on Apr 18, 2011 11:20 PM EDT
in Habs Game Recaps
Email
PrintWell the dream of a Montreal Canadiens sweep of the Boston Bruins is over. But seriously, did we really expect the Bruins to play three straight lack luster games? Well, they almost did.
Down by two goals entering the third period, the Canadiens battled hard in the final 20 minutes, using their speed over the Bruins' slow defense to make a game of it. Boston coach Claude Julien could have just played a shut down period, similar to what his counterpart Jacques Martin would do, but chose not to. It could have cost him a three game deficit.
Unfortunately for the Canadiens, they didn't seem to have the effort we saw in the first two games during the first half of the game. The Bruins may have got a break in a 4-2 Game Three win.
First goals are always pivotal in the playoffs, and in this game the Bruins struck first. The Canadiens were unable to establish control in their own end. That allowed David Krejci to skate in alone, fresh off the bench, and take a perfect pass from Patrice Bergeron to beat Carey Price at 3:11 of the first period.
The Bruins then began to pick up momentum and begin driving pucks at Price, and the Canadiens goaltender was then called on to make a string of quick saves. Nathan Horton managed to bank a shot off of the pad of Price at 14:38 to give them a two-goal lead.
"They came out playing like a team that was down two games," Price said after the game. "They capitalized on a couple mistakes out there, and that was all they needed."
The Canadiens netminder admitted that he and his teammates played unprepared with a loose morning skate, much to the chagrin of their coaches, and it showed in the first half of the game. Benoit Pouliot demonstrated that, as well by taking a charging call and fighting major for a tussle with Andrew Ference late in the period. It clearly did not impress coach Martin, as he limited the forward to 1:16 TOI the rest of the night.
The trend carried for the Canadiens into the second period. Price, known for his smart stick-handling made a clearly mental error by shooting the puck off the shin of Mark Recchi and onto the stick of Rich Peverley at 2:02 of the second.
"We got what we deserved in the first period," he said. "It makes you aware of the real situation. If we don't play like we did in Boston, we're not going to win."
Andrei Kostitsyn managed to get the Bell Centre crowd back into the game, netting his first playoff goal in 19 games at 7:03.
From there, the ice tilted strongly in the Canadiens favour. From the drop of the puck, they took control of the period, managing 15 shots on the Bruins Tim Thomas.
The overall picture of momentum change could be viewed by stats alone. During a TV time out, around the 9:39 mark of the second period, the Bruins had 15 SOG, 10 shots blocked and 10 that missed. By game's end their final totals were 25-17-14. The Canadiens were 15-8-5 and 36-22-9 at those same points respectively.
Tim Thomas played what was tweeted by Bruins blogger Joe Haggerty as "vintage Thomas." If by that you mean vintage as getting lucky bounces, catching pucks that are going wide by 15', making "outstanding saves" on shots 30+ feet out, or off a guy who has to jump over/shoot around a bunch of sticks, then yes he did. HNIC's Garry Galley and Glenn Healy echoed Haggerty's thoughts, after critiquing the Bruins netminder most of the series.
Already giving up a soft goal to Kostitsyn earlier in the game, Thomas surrendered a second goal to Tomas Plekanec at 4:08. The Canadiens center made a spinorama move, similar to his Game One attempt, and this time it found the five hole past Thomas.
Regardless of the views on Thomas, it was too late for the Canadiens as Chris Kelly put the game out of reach with an empty net goal.
The Canadiens now have a 2-1 series lead, and will take Tuesday off to regroup for Game 4 on Thursday.
"It's going to be good to refocus and reset ourselves," Price said. "We need to be ready to go. We had a lot of good things to take out of that game."
The Bruins will head off to Lake Placid, NY to prepare for Thursday's game, and have to realize they nearly had a deja vu of last year's Game Seven, almost blowing a three-goal lead.
Bruins captain Zdeno Chara returned for Game Three, and played 26:20. Chara was on the ice for two Bruins goals and both Canadiens goals.
P.K. Subban led both teams in TOI, for the third straight game, with 26:50.
The winning side from Stanley Cup of Chowder
Three Stars: 1. Patrice Bergeron 2. Andrei Kostitsyn 3. Mike Cammalleri
Scoring Summary
| SCORERS | |
| First period | |
| 03:11 BOS | David Krejci, 1 (Patrice Bergeron, 1 Dennis Seidenberg, 1) (BOS: 30 33 44 37 46 17 MTL: 44 6 13 14 46 31) |
| 14:38 BOS | Nathan Horton, 1 (Zdeno Chara, 1 Adam Mcquaid, 1) (BOS: 30 33 18 37 54 63 MTL: 6 52 31 58 53 76) |
| Second period | |
| 02:02 BOS | Rich Peverley, 1 (Mark Recchi, 2 Kirk Macdonald, 1) (BOS: 28 30 12 44 49 63 MTL: 75 55 52 13 31 94) |
| 07:03 MTL | Andrei Kostitsyn, 1 (Michael Cammalleri, 2 Roman Hamrlik, 2) (BOS: 30 33 22 44 20 49 MTL: 44 55 13 14 46 31) |
| Third period | |
| 04:08 MTL | Tomas Plekanec, 1 (Michael Cammalleri, 3 P.k. Subban, 1) (BOS: 30 33 44 18 46 17 MTL: 75 13 14 46 31 76) |
| 19:34 BOS | Chris Kelly, 1 (Mark Recchi, 3 Patrice Bergeron, 2) (BOS: 28 30 21 23 44 37 MTL: 11 21 13 14 20 76) |
195 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There is one statistic that never lies, the importance of the game’s first goal. In the playoffs, it’s the ultimate tone setter. Teams that get them win games and some series’, but those who can consistently overcome them win Stanley Cups.
By either luck, or Tim Thomas’ gratuitous rebounds over two games, the Habs gained a surprising 2-0 lead, but now the Bruins will truly make Montreal earn the series win the hard way, if at all.
Canadiens played a great final 25-30 minutes in this one, but it means zilch come the start of game 4.
It is the Devils model and essential to success. I think every game they won in the playoffs last season they scored first.
by Chris Boyle on Apr 19, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
I think we won one against the Penguins when Crosby scored first.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I took a quick look and saw they were 8-2-1 when scoring first, didn’t look close enough to find the 9th game.
No worries. Just going off memory, but this team isn’t very good at coming back.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
How did I get 8-2-1? Damn Bettman and his extra point! They were 8-3.
Which means they were 1-7 when the opposition scores first.
Not a great record, that’s for sure. Although for some reason, I’m not even sure if the stats would corroborate this gut feeling, I feel like they’re better coming from behind this year than last, down by 1 at least.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Am I the only one who feels kind of cheated though? Better team that they are, imagine having Markov, Gorges and Pacioretty back. It just seems like this year could have been so great, but we’ll have to settle for pretty good.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
They have one more season to ice a powerhouse, then the Subban/Price bargain cost window closes. They would have been a legit contender had they remained healthy this season.
Next season should be a big year, especially if you believe in luck always regressing to the norm.
I think a lot depends on where Gauthier spends his money. He’s impressed me so far as a manager (aside from the unavoidable Sergei trade), but I’m still worried that somehow Markov or Wiz will be allowed to walk.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I often say it’s not so much the first goal but the second. You can’t really take your foot off the gas with just a 1 goal lead, but get a second and you can sit pretty. Usually there is more than one goal in a game… if the game goes to 1-1 it really doesn’t matter who scored first.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
A 1-0 lead in the first period allows the Habs to counter punch, this presents opportunities to make it 2-0. It is the Devils model and when the Devils score first against the Habs it sets up an entirely different game then when the Habs score first.
When teams pinch or try to do to much turnovers result and the Devils model is to capitalize. That is why goal one is important. It allows each team to set the tempo.
The thing I noticed over 3 games is that the Bruins struggle to create offense off the rush, most of it is cycle or zone play. That is the most devastating aspect of losing Marc Savard for them. Just one more reason that scoring early can create neutral/defensive zone turnovers and push the advantage to Montreal.
Meh, I don’t think Game 1 played out quite like that. It was a 1-0 game and the Habs let the Bruins control the 2nd period completely. One measly PP goal and it was completely different.
Once the third period starts, then the bets are off. But Game 1 didn’t really play out like that. Game 2 did, but then again, they scored two goals quite quickly. Same with Boston in Game 3.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Apr 20, 2011 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
First, nobody lets anybody control a period completely. It happens because athletes don’t perform perfectly 100% of the time. If they did then the better team would win every game. I don’t see how the Bruins controlling the second period proves this inaccurate.
by Chris Boyle on Apr 20, 2011 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
It was exciting old-time fire wagon hockey. The Canadiens looked like the Flying Frenchmen of old, skating up and down and generating scoring chances during the last two periods down 3-0 and scoring twice to come close.
Unlike last year against the Flyers, the Canadiens did not allow the Bruins to play the trap game and shut them down. They used their speed effectively to get by the Bruins, they played tough and gave some big hits and came very close to tying this game from a 3-0 deficit. This is a positive to take to the next game. As a team they know they outplayed the Bruins and lost a game they shouldn’t have. If they had the same effort in the 1st period, they would have easily won. They shouldn’t have allowed two sloppy goals after the Bruins opened the scoring.
If the Canadiens continue to play with their never quit attitude, they will win this series and be a tough oponent for any team. Once again, the goaltending of Carey Price gave them a chance to get back in the game and almost make a memorable come back.
question
I have a question to all the Habs fans. Why didnt anyone call 9-1-1 after the Pouliot attempt to end Boychuk’s career? Chara’s hit on floppy max was perfectly clean, he was just unlucky. Pouliot left his feet and led with an elbow, isnt that assault? Before you say “Boychuk wasnt hurt” answer me this question: If a kid shoots at a group of people and doesnt hurt anyone, should the judge drop the attempted murder charges? The intent was there. Do I think 9-1-1 should be called?? Absolutely not. Should the Montreal fans have called 9-1-1 on Chara?? Come on, are you serious?
Now to a more important question……why cant the Habs play hockey, instead of flopping around like a soccer player every time someone touches you? Play like a man, take a hit every now and then. I am glad the ref’s didnt call every little flop that the Habs tried to get in their favor…..at least someone has some respect for the way the game is supposed to be played.
Really? Have you seen one person on here defend Pouliot? Do you see anybody telling us his intent was to throw a bodycheck and his elbow wasn’t meant to land near the head? Do you hear us arguing intent? How about if we placed Boychuk 20 feet from the boards the result would be different argument.
Childish comparisons to prove what point exactly? That Canadiens fans are hypocrites? Through a scenario in which no injury or impact occurred? sigh.
I am not sure which stat is more telling of this series…the fact that Bruins have never come back from 0-2 down or that the Habs have dropped the last two series in which they have won the first two on the road.
Good game last night guys, both teams played well and I was glad to see Martin sit Pouliot after that run he made at the end of the period. You guys keep talking about how goon oriented we are and what not and then we watch the Habs slewfoot their way around the ice last night and take charges at guys from the red line. It was a good thing it wasnt Boychuk or Mcquaid that got a hold of him and that it was friendly lightweight Andrew Ference.
A bit surprising is how all I heard was how god like Price was over the first two games and Thomas wins a game stopping 34 shots and a lot of great ones in the 3rd period and you say the Bruins were lucky to win that one. Correction, if Price had not recovered and made some key stops early that game could have easily have been 5-0. See ya Thursday night!
Because Thomas gave up two brutal goals to make it a game. If that was Vintage Thomas then how can anybody make an argument for him as the best goaltender in the league? That was horrific goaltending. Sure he made 1-2 big saves in the 3rd, but the game is a cakewalk if he doesn’t give the Habs life. Go take a look at the ESPN gamecast. The shots were all perimeter based.
The Habs took a period off and you can’t do that to a team down 2-0. The Bruins had more chances and deserved to win, the Habs almost weaseled themselves to OT with a late surge, but it wasn’t enough.
I am not arguing the fact that the 2 goals were horrible at all because they flat out were. That being said though is it not a gret goalie who puts that behind him and shuts the door in the final minutes when the Habs were all over the Bruins.
As for perimeter shots in looking at the gamecast as you directed I see a total of 14 shots from in close or in scoring opportunities. That would be just over 1/3 of your total shots on goal. Thomas stopped 14 shots from within the tops of the circles and in between the dots which are considered good scoring zones. I get that you guys love Price and deserveldy so as he is a supreme talent, but give credit when its due. Thomas has a better year then Price (statistically there is no comparison but I do understand that stats dont tell the whole story) and you guys cant give him any credit at all.
by beachguy113 on Apr 19, 2011 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh come on, that is such a cliche. If he doesn’t give up the two brutal goals he doesn’t need to make big saves late in the 3rd. Putting behind the bad goals doesn’t make you mentally strong, if you were you wouldn’t have had mental lapses or guessed on the two bad goals.
If you want to extend that same zone to Price the number becomes 13 of his 25 shots over 50%. You have extended the zone to an extreme to add in and extra 3-4 shots for Thomas as goals are rarely scored from the top of the faceoff circle even with the dot.
Either way, you are looking at 1 extra shot for Thomas in the scoring area in regards to Price. Olivier has the scoring chances at 17-13 for Boston and 16-4 before the first brutal goal that let the Habs back in the game.
The thing that is being glossed over here is that the goals Thomas allowed were not transition goals, they weren’t goals where he needed to cheat because of secondary options. He had both planes dominated and his defense closed off the passing options. He was facing a shot with very little other options and had the ability to set and he blew them. Price allowed bad goals, but one was a poor clearing pass that has nothing to do with technique.
THAT is “Vintage Thomas”. We all know that and that is my problem with him. Stats are so unreliable that he blows two goals and STILL has a .944 SV%. What does that tell you?
by Chris Boyle on Apr 19, 2011 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
It tells me he won the game
You say its a cliche but I would much rather have a goalie who will keep his head in the game and play through the tough games then just throw his arms up in the air after being mocked by his own home crowd.
As for Price I never said anything negative about his game last night. In fact I said he kept teh Canadiens in it so I am not sure why you needed to prove the Carey Price aspect of things.
Actually the top of the circles are a great scoring position. Not sure which version of hockey you play or watch but every coach I have ever played for or talked to always drew a line from the posts out on angle to the dots and then straight up to the top of the circle and across to the other dot. So yes it is a great scoring chance when you have a shot from there. Wonder why there are so many set plays off face offs to get that guy open cutting off the wall or having a guy top of circle on the inside and draw it right back to him (Lucic actually beat Price on one of those this season) for the shot.
So I guess the part that you gloss over is that Price is horrible in the playoffs at home. I didnt see you mentioning him being out of position on the Horton goal because if he does not over extend him self the bank shot is not there. The giveaway well enough said. So I guess thats just vintage playoff Price.
How about a guy who has tracked the probability of goals for about 800 NHL games over 2010. Not too many goals being scored from the top of the face-off circles, let alone where you extend them to the width of the face-off dot, but lets go with your coaches opinion.
I guess through your example that Patrick Roy is not mentally tough? I do recall him throwing his arms in the air as he was mocked by his home crowd.
The mentally tough argument is a ridiculous cliche perpetuated by the media for decades. If Thomas head was in the game it would have been 3-0!! Let’s simplify your argument.
In order to be mentally tough to make saves, you have to make the assumption that when a goaltender wants to make the save, and has a chance, he does. He will not allow bad goals because he is “mentally tough”.
So we then must say that Tim Thomas in a 3-0 lead was NOT mentally tough. Tim Thomas with a 3-1 lead was NOT mentally tough. Tim Thomas with a 3-2 lead, mentally tough? So he miraculously got mentally tough midway through the 3rd period? We are taking two incidences of mistakes and negating them because he didn’t make three? Seems convenient.
It is result based analysis. It is excuse making. I didn’t excuse Price being out of position, I just didn’t mention it. It is ONE major technical mistake in 3 games and is unimportant. Thomas is out of position on almost every play because he likes to guess.
He was awful last night, I don’t care about the other noise, it is only intended to distract you from the stink of goals one and two.
well i would say the second major technical mistake was the Peverley goal because if he was sound technically playing the game as he is supposed to be, Price would not have risked a clearing pass that bounced of a forechecker he would have put the puck off to the weak side where the 3 Bruin forecheckers were not. So all in all 2 mistakes by each goalie that both lead to goals. I guess though when its Price you seem to forget that. So when you say “he was awful” I assume you are talking about both goalies?
As for the shot tracking guy I would love to see the numbers that have been compiled.
That is not a technical mistake, it was a mental mistake. A poor decision in which we are analyzing the result. When your goaltender can handle the puck that is going to happen once every 10 games. Martin Brodeur, one of the greatest puck handling goaltenders of all-time made a worse blunder in the Stanley Cup Final, you take the bad with the good because it protects your defensemen and begins transition opportunities.
Ultimately it is a bad goal, but one that has an upside or a positive outcome the majority of the time. Thomas’ mistakes had zero upside, ever.
If you have convinced yourself that Thomas’ mistakes are the equal to Price’s, that is your prerogative. Price wasn’t awful last night, he had the more difficult shots and the numbers and highlights at NHL.com would back that up.
I will not be posting any shot tracking numbers until the research is complete and that will not be any time soon.
No I just more want to see it out of pure curiousity. Is there an english version by any chance? I would get my french speaking gf to read it for me but I think it would be too confusing for her.
I can’t read french. I just look at the scoring chances list and I check out the players on the ice and in the past have cross referenced them to the NHL HTML shot charts. Olivier is fairly accurate even though it is all subjective.
Absolutely Right
Hey Guys, Bruins fan here, and I’m not here to troll, but I read Chris’ post and had to reply. Chris you are absolutely right. All of a sudden it is fashionable to categorize Tim Thomas as a great goalie. He just isn’t and last night was a perfect example of who Tim Thomas is. It’s very simple, Tim Thomas is a great save goalie, he’s just not a big save goalie. The two goals he gave up last night were despicable, and he single-handedly let MTL back in the game. The fact is, you need a goalie to steal a game once in a while in the playoffs, a la Jaroslav Halak. The next game Thomas steals will be his first.
Keep at it Chris, you are absolutely right.
I am not recently saying Thomas is a great goalie. He has been for a few years IMO. Yes the two goals he gave up last night were brutal. So were two of Prices. He might have let Montreal in the game but he also did not allow a 3rd goal and thats what matters. You guys can go on and on about your scoring chances and big save, great save debate. Thomas has earned his stripes over the last 6 seasons and I will leave it as its your opinion that hes not. I disagree with you but I have a feeling we could go back and forth on this for years depending on your angle.
My angle is as a goaltending coach, first and foremost, not a fan. His technique and positioning are poor, that is not a debate and you know this.
He was bad last night. That is also not a debate. Cliche driven arguments and pointing at his SV% are not arguments.
Dwayne Roloson and Jose Theodore cracked .930 before. Cristobal Huet put up a .929. It is a flawed stat that rewards team defensive strength. Rask put up a .931 just last season on the same team.
Well because you are a goalie coach and dont like Thomas’ technique is no reason to say he isnt a great goalie. You say that save percentages are a mockery and what not so fine. How about we go with winning percentage? Thomas puts most goalies to shame this year in that. I guess his 2.00 GAA and .716 points earned percentage just dont him any justice. You are right, Thomas is horrible….two vezinas which you surely discount as well so he might as well retire. How did he even make it out of minor hockey.
Sigh. WIns are a team based stat, so is SV%. There are plenty of poor goalies who won a lot of games because they played on great teams.
cough Jimmy Howard cough
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Chris Osgood is 10th ALL TIME in wins. In the history of the NHL.
Does that mean he is one of the best goaltenders of all-time?
317-149-46 with Detroit for a .655 winning %
84-67-20-0 with Blues/Isles for a .545 winning %
Slight difference.
Agreed 100%
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok so if we dont use stats to compare what do we use? Opinions right? So if stats dont work and its all opinions that we go on then we might as well put our racing slicks on and going join NASCAR cause we be goin in circles!!
The stats must have context. Why do you think every stat head is looking for a shot model? It is because the traditional stats are extremely flawed.
When something doesn’t make sense to me, I study the subject (in this case, Tim Thomas) and try to understand where these numbers are coming from. Sometimes the visual correlates and sometimes it doesn’t.
Everything Thomas does flies in the face of goaltending and every time I watch him he creates his own problems.
I can understand if you don’t trust me as being biased, but feel free go through my EOTP article archive and take a look at how I form my opinions. I have no love for the Sabres or Hurricanes but have a massive mancrush on Miller and Ward. I don’t care what their SV% is on a yearly basis I know they are the best.
I am actually a big fan of Tuukka Rask and called his statistical decline this season based on previous research.
It was stupid and if he had hit him it would have been just as dumb. Pouliot makes stupid decisions all the time and that is why he is an enigma. Nothing will happen because he missed it.
White had the play lined up and he should have left the contact to him.
I am not a huge follower of Pouliot but it seems like he has the skills but just doesnt care. He seems on a different page than most of the Canadiens.
by beachguy113 on Apr 19, 2011 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
The only difference being that when Richer was 23 he had two 50 goal seasons on his resume.
by Chris Boyle on Apr 19, 2011 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
When Pouliot is on his game like he was in Nov. – Dec. he adds depth to the 3rd and 4th lines. He is a gifted scorer and the best on this team after Cammalleri, Gionta, and Kostitsyn. He has size and is a great playmaker. If someone like Kirk Muller talks to him and gets him back on his game he could be a real boost to this team.
In the play-offs you need all the weapons you can get. Let’s hope Halpern come back for Game 4. His presence on the face-off will help.
Sit Pouliot?
He’s been in the worst funk of the team, next to Gomez. But at least Gomez gets some helpers. Pouliot takes a lot of bad penalties at bad times. But he’s not even generating chances. I’m a bit concerned about him, he just doesn’t have the good vibe going like others on the team have. Maybe Weber should play in his spot??/ Definitely Halpern will be good if anything for faceoffs as you mention.
by Habs Fan in LeafLand on Apr 19, 2011 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Desharnais is in a similar funk. Halpern can easily sub for either of them.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
Desharnais at least has been really good on the PK, which helps cut down Plekanec’s ice time.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, but Halpern could just take Desharnais’ PK time and do the same thing.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Apr 20, 2011 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
True enough, but if Halpern is still not 100% it would be better to shelter him a bit for a couple games.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 20, 2011 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Gomez Hit
The Pouliot hit didn’t really bother me very much. Just a dumb play and a clear two minute penalty. The hit that still bothers me was Scott Gomez pushing Chris Kelly’s head (face) into the post. I thought he did it intentionally and I’m surprised it didn’t get more attention.
Just like the Chara hit on Pacioretty, Kelly was in a vulnerable position and Gomez could have let up but didn’t. It was a dangerous play and, to me, it’s exactly what we need to get out of the game. That said the B’s aren’t going to whine. Just move on and try to get a win Thurs. night. Kelly himself said after the game that he knows Gomez is a good honest player, so he’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and call it a good hard play. That’s why I love the Bruins. No whining, no diving and no need to get the RCMP involved.
I agree that was a much worse hit than what Pouliot did. It was a dirty play on a guy who couldn’t defend himself. However there’s no way Gomez could control where Kelly’s face would go when he fell. I wouldn’t be comparing it to Chara’s hit on Pacioretty, as that was clearly one player directing another into an obstacle, instead of just a little dirty hit.
However your last point is completely delusional. The Bruins don’t whine? Buddy, they’ve been whining in the media all year long, and through the first 3 games of the series they’ve outdove Montreal by a factor of 3-1. Marchand dives as soon as someone breathes on him. Don’t come in here pretending one team is more honourable than the other, when it’s your team that’s been bitching to the media constantly since January, and ours that just kept silent other than to say the Bruins are a good team.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Has a Bruin fan ever cited an example other than Ribeiro for Habs diving?
You want me to go and screen cap every Bruins dive? No matter what I say you wouldn’t believe it anyway because you can only see through black and yellow (yes, yellow not gold) glasses.
Just for kicks though, I did keep track of the dives in game 1 just to throw it in Bruins fans faces should the come over to bitch:
Horton: 4 dives
Marchand: 3 dives
Lucic: 2 dives
Kelly: 1 dive
Recchi: 1 dive
Peverley: 1 dive
On the Habs? Subban: 1 dive, and that’s it.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions
That is subjective and changes with the bias perspective though. A Bruins fan will just dispute the numbers and discredit them.
Krejci and Marchand have complained. Marchand complained about the Habs not manning up to fight, dude hasn’t fought once in his NHL career.
Actually you can’t give more, even if we’d like: http://www.hockeyfights.com/players/2018
He’s fought once. Yet Bruins fans call Subban gutless, he’s had 4 fights.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Especially with a loss to Andrew Cogliano of all people.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Uh, yeah. Marchand wanted no part in that fight and hung on for dear life. Look at the vote count.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Again, no specific examples, so nothing to respond to.
On the other hand, one team has a league-wide reputation for diving. One city has started a criminal investigation regarding a play in a hockey game, and one city has booed another country’s national anthem. I’ll let you guess which city that is, buddy.
You are saying provide evidence and then say:
“one team has a league-wide reputation for diving”
Can you corroborate this? You would need essentially 10-20 examples from different teams to prove this and not Jack Edwards ridiculous statements.
I find it especially funny since the most respected team in the NHL, the Detroit Red Wings, was full of praise for our team after the game we played against them earlier in the year. Lidstrom of all people said that as a team we play the right way. That’s huge.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions
The last time the American national anthem was roundly booed in Montreal was 2004.
Reputation league wide of diving by the Canadiens is a complete fantasy by the Boston Bruins and their fans. To take a page out of your book, go ahead and cite some examples that don’t include Ribeiro.
The police starting an investigation has nothing to do with the Montreal Canadiens, or even their fans. The investigation was started at the behest of politicians.
It’s funny that you’re so insistent on providing specific examples when you did nothing of the sort to begin your argument.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed, you can’t call out somebody for not providing evidence and then make a sweeping generalization without evidence.
That’s the way Bruins fans operate. Just like after game 2 there were a ton of them saying they only lost because Chara is out, and the manager of SCOC was saying Chara makes a bigger impact on a team than Markov and Gorges combined, yet after the Pacioretty hit these same fans were saying Chara is clumsy, doesn’t know where he is on the ice, and doesn’t know what players are on the ice with him. Which one is it? Does he suck or is he awesome? You can’t have it both ways.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Serious? Thats the way Bruin fans operate? That is the line you use? Generalization at its finest. I am pretty sure I didnt use that as an excuse for us losing at all. In fact I went the opposite and was very disappointed that someone did not step up.
Kudos to you. But reading SCOC and some of the people who came in here, including the manager of SCOC, that was a majority opinion.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions
actually the majority opinion over there wasnt that if Chara was there we would have won it was how disappointed we were being down 0-2 after being on home ice. At least I didnt see anyone that up in arms making excuses or at least they shouldnt be.
I saw a lot of comments saying Chara being scratched deflated the team and such. The most prevailing one was the manager of SCOC.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I can see that…I think what he meant by it was that it was a letdown for the team to see him get dressed take warm up and then not play. Not in a sense of that it was meant that it was the reason we lost but more that it put the team in down mood before the game. I am not sure though as I didnt write it.
SCOC also came on here after the game and claimed Chara was better than Markov and Gorges combined.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions
hey thats his opinion and hes entitled to it. I think Georges is highly underrated and I do like Markov alot; but I think to a degree and a different statement he is right. Chara means more to Boston then either of those players mean to Montreal seperate or combined. Chara is far and away the most important player on the Bruins. When you have Tomas Kaberle playing 28 mins a game you are in trouble. You take Markov and Georges away the Canadiens defence is still pretty solid from top to bottom. Would they be better with one or both in the lineup…of course they would but I hope you get what I am saying in this.
I get what you’re saying, but I think it underestimates the talent of Andrei Markov. Markov is probably the most underrated defenseman in the NHL for the last 5-6 seasons or so. The gap between him and Chara is actually astoundingly small. Chara is a physical powerhouse, but Markov is better positionally and offensively. Markov’s game is very similar to Nicklas Lidstrom, although obviously not as good because Lidstrom is indisputably one of the greatest ever.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Dont get me wrong I am not arguing the talent level of Markov at all (hes a stud and I sure hope he gets out of Montreal soon!!)…I just said the importance of each player to their team when you look at the rest of their lineup.
Ok, but you take Markov out of the Habs lineup this year they still finish 6th in the conf and make the playoffs. Thankfully we have had Chara all year but where do you think the Bruins would be without him? I know we cant answer it definitively but…..it would not be good. That is all I am saying. When you look at the 3rd pairings for each team Ference/Mcquaid and Spack/Sopel who would you rather have?
Our defense is much deeper, I agree.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Current players please.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Divers:
Subban, Wizniewski has had 2 or 3 big ones in the playoffs already (one on the so called hook on Krejci), Eller has taken a few tumbles in the past, and Plekanec has some pretty good ones to go with as well. That is some current players
Wisniewski’s actions on the Krejci hook was not a dive, that was gamesmanship or embellishment. It happens on pretty much every penalty call in the NHL these days, and if you don’t think the Bruins do it on every single high stick or holding call you’re delusional.
The rest of what you said is not specific examples, it’s only naming players. We know Subban dived in game 1 on Krejci, but that’s it. So far the count still stands at 1.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok so where are your specific examples of the Bruins dives? You listed names and numbers with no examples
Just off the top of my head, Kelly’s dive was after a Bruins dump in (3rd period I believe), he skated towards a Hab player, knicked his stick and took a massive tumble.
One of Marchand’s was the interference call on Hamrlik, where barely any contact was made but he went down in a heap.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
The Marchand call would be just gamesmanship as you eluded to earlier so we can throw that one out. Are you talking about Kelly into the net last night on Gomez?
No I’m talking about Kelly in game 1. And embellishment would be an arm wave or faking losing balance, when you fall down it’s a dive.
The Gomez hit on Kelly was dirty, I didn’t like it.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
and this is where bias comes into play. I see the call on Krejci and IMO its a dive by Wisniewski and you see the Hamrlik call on Marchand as a dive. Just depends on what side of the fence you sit on.
Not really, because I called the call on Krejci where he hooked Subban a dive, even though Krejci still deserved the penalty. I’m saying if someone doesn’t fall, it’s not a dive.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
ahhh now I have found our issue. Penalties are called all the time whether a guy falls or not so I classify a dive as any play or act that is embellished or acted upon in hopes of drawing a penalty.
There’s the disconnect for us then. Honestly though if that’s what you consider a dive, then every high sticking call in the last decade also included a dive.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions
not saying that at all….I have been hit in the face with a stick numerous times and have the scars to prove it and I know how instantly painful and jolting it is. Every call and every play has its own variables around it and I judge based on that. I mean a guy like Subban has the ability to throw massive open ice hits and is very strong on his skates but for some reason a stick hits his hand and hes sprawled on the ice (not pointing out Subban just using him as an example). thats a dive. Throwing your head back because you just took a stick in the face is not an embellishment IMO
Throwing your head back because you just took a stick in the face is not an embellishment IMO
Yet Crosby has been called a diver for his entire career specifically for actions like this, so there’s really no consensus on what constitutes a dive.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
We discussed it, but you didn’t bring up any examples that ended up checking out.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Here’s one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhShrOAMZ-E
Current players please.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Out of curiosity, why current?
Current players do not help a sterotype, they’re the ones that would help break it.
Because we’re talking about this current team, and whether or not they’re divers. Higgs started this by calling the team whiners and divers.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions
So I can bring up video of Mike Milbury charging into the stands to perpetuate the league wide myth of the Bruins being goons?
And here I am to ruin it: every time I’ve been to NYC I’ve found New Yorkers to be incredibly nice people.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions
they are nice because
they are afraid of Milbury beating them with their own shoes. He singlehandedly changed the culture of NYers.
by I_miss_Switzer on Apr 19, 2011 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
What? Philly has stated that many times.
A few Rags fans too.
I’m out of market, so I can’t speak for their media, but fans share this opinion, as much as a sports website is a valid stat of fan opinion.
All I’ve heard from the Rangers is Dubinsky saying Subban slew footed him, which last I checked wasn’t a dive.
As for the Flyers, you said that before as well, but you didn’t link to anything corroborating it. And even if you could, that’s two teams, hardly league wide reputation.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Not e member, but again we’re not talking about fans, every fan is biased against rival teams. The assertion was that Montreal has a league wide reputation as divers, which insinuates two things 1) more than 15 teams believe this, 2) this opinion comes from people within the league, not just fans. Neither point has been corroborated.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I really wouldn’t figure a team a such as the Kings or Sharks would come into said discussion.
You know it would be in the East, and more specifically in the Northeast and Atlantic Divisions, where such a rep would come from.
When concerning the Canadiens, it’s more likely teams in the NW division in the west would be counted on for opinions because they play twice a year, but I’m not sure what your point is.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
“more than 15 teams believe this”
I would counter that if your Conference believes something, that’d be enough.
Not stating the conference believes so, but why “15 or more”?
“League wide” tells me that it’s more than just teams that see you often, that even one game would be enough for western teams to agree.
But so far we’ve only seen one team call the Habs divers, and it just so happens to be the Bruins. And the guy who said it the most this year just so happens to be one of the biggest divers and cheap shot artists in the NHL.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Mine.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions
:)
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I heard this for the first time yesterday and it was a sound clip from Jack Edwards. I live in Toronto, the home of Hab hate and I have NEVER heard this.
I know a lot of guys who hate Ribeiro. I know a lot of guys who hate PK, but none of them have told me the Habs are known league wide as a bunch of divers.
It is as relevant a statement as me saying the Bruins and Flyers are known league wide as two of the dirtiest teams in the league.
No, he’s saying that stating that the Bruins are known to be dirty is a useless and irrelevant statement.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Bruins are the 8th most penalized team in the NHL and MTL is the 10th most penalized team. The difference in penalty minutes is exactly 8 minutes. That’s a wash but keep trying.
Montreal was the most penalized team actually, where are you getting your stats?
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry guys, I just saw this reply. Here’s the link:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.htm?fetchKey=20112ALLAAAAll&sort=penaltyMinutes&viewName=penalties
That includes fighting majors. Look at this instead: http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.htm?fetchKey=20112ALLAAAAll&sort=timesShort&viewName=penaltyKill
Boston is the 4th least penalized team in the NHL, and Montreal is the most penalized.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
so then who is the goon team???? JOKING! I know we have a rep as the big bad bruins and I am fine with that. It is a collection of opinions and events over the course of the life of the franchise that seems to define it. As with diving and whining with the Canadiens. It might not be 100% current or accurate but that is where it comes from.
In actuality the penalty differential for the Canadiens has more to do with being small than anything, in my opinion. There’s the preconceived notion by officials that small = weak so when we take down a player, it was “obviously” and infraction, and when our players go down, it’s “obviously” because they’re weak. We get fewer calls for us and more against us for that reason alone. It’s been incredibly frustrating for 2 years.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Here’s another, and why do you guys get to decide which examples are relevant and which ones are not? A large sample size, devoloped over a long period of time, is how you get a “reputation”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNw8ZZT8tOU
Funny that I brought this up before you did. I knew it would come up, and it’s one of the only things you can point to. It was forever ago.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
By the way, if you can’t admit that the Canadiens have a reputation for diving you’re just in denial. They also have a reputation for being more “skilled” than the Bruins. I can’t quantify that, but I acknowledge it to be true. If you can’t be honest about what your team is then there’s no chance to have a rational discussion.
You tell us that we need to corroborate statements, then you don’t and tell us
If you can’t be honest about what your team is then there’s no chance to have a rational discussion.
That is opinion based on your bias. Not something we need to acknowledge without proof that the “rest of the league” acknowledges this.
Are you really confused by his question? You made the original claim that Montreal is a team of divers and whiners, and has a reputation league wide for doing such.
You didn’t provide a single example of a current Hab diving when challenged to do so, and you certainly didn’t provide any examples of whining. You also failed to provide any evidence that there’s a league wide reputation for it.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Here’s another:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3kRHPXMRiQ&feature=related
Can’t really call that a dive, look at the torque on Lecavalier’s stick after the contact. Perhaps slight embellishment, but you can’t deny that would hurt.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions
All well and good, but please don’t deny the Canadiens have a reputation for diving. When you do it makes you sound like a fanboy that’s just in denial about his team.
“Perhaps slight embellishment”, you said it yourself.
You’ve yet to prove that outside of Boston the Canadiens have this reputation. You’ve shown 1 single dive from 85 games this season, and even that was after a brutal two handed slash by Lecavalier so it’s up for debate if it’s even a dive.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought it was funny a couple weeks ago when the manager over at SCOC shouted me down for pointing out that some of his regulars had made some bigoted statements on his website and over here at EOTP. He claimed nothing of the sort had ever happened specifically with the word frog. How odd, because I screen capped it last night:
To be clear, I still think most people on SCOC are good people, especially legion and beachguy, but the manager is an idiot on the same level as Jack Edwards.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:04 PM EDT reply actions
I agree that stuff should not be said. My gf is a french-immersion teacher here in ontario so if I get into anything like that I am sure my life would be over. She has a mean right cross and a collection of knives in the kitchen to choose from.
You never mess with the girlfriends, it’s just common sense. ;)
A french immersion teacher though? Doesn’t the Bruins marketing campaign strictly forbid you from dating within the division?
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Shes actually a Sens fan and I dont consider them a rival at all because well they just arent. I have a hard time thinking any new rivalries will be formed with this new NHL with so many teams and the playoff seeding the way it is. But getting to the marketing thing…I actually posted the Bruins/Habs commercial on her fb wall the other day and she got a good laugh out of it. I am slowly educating her on what the rivalry is and where it comes from because she is just a casual hockey fan….that being said she is starting to get it after the last week or so! That being said I leave on Thursday for the Domincan for a good friends wedding and dont get back til late next thurs so I will be either missing a historic comeback by the Bruins or their last few games of this year.
I agree with you on the Sens, they just seem so… irrelevant. Even when they were good.
Have fun in the Dominican!
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Here’s another:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBWUIorhOK4&feature=related
You’re out of your mind, that’s not a dive.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
and this is where the bias comes in because I see it as one. He basically does a half twirl and falls to the ice…you can even hear the commentator say “tits is lucky axelsson is going at all”
If anything this is where confirmation bias comes in for Bruins fans, as Kostitsyn clearly lost his footing. I don’t see how that’s a dive in any way. Sometimes players do happen to fall.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
And here’s another:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcDqB-3UvxI&feature=related
Right, I’m sure a cross check in the chin didn’t hurt…
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions
And here’s another:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2YqPIe51F8&feature=related
Not a current Hab.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions
And here’s another:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXoYSaVduRA&feature=related
Not a current Hab, also an incredibly dangerous play by the Bruin.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Embellishment, sure, but he was going down anyway. And if we want to bring goalies in on this, aside from Dwayne Roloson, Thomas is probably the biggest diver in the game.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions
You’re probably right on that one. HNiC was showing highlights of Thomas in the first period last night, and about 3 times he just lost his footing for no reason.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
You asked me to provide examples and I did. Just admit the Canadiens have a “reputation” for diving. Even if you don’t actually think it’s legit, they DO have that reputation.
You didn’t provide any evidence of a reputation for diving, only that you believe they dive. 3/5 clips you posted the player is falling, not diving, and the other 2 aren’t Canadiens anymore. You’ve yet to provide a single example of a team other than the Bruins who thinks the Canadiens are divers, which is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to prove your statement that they have a reputation above and beyond other teams as divers.
I’ll make it easy for you. Please find 5 teams NOT from Boston that say the Canadiens are divers within the last season, or 8 from the last 2 seasons.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, you need to show quotes from other players in the league that the team as a whole are divers. One player (ie. Subban) over and over does not establish a reputation as a team of divers.
If you can do that, I will buy it.
Actually I gave you specific conditions for which your point could be proven, so even if you did such and I denied it I would look like a fool. The ball is in your court.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the parameters I set up are pretty weak and fair, don’t you? I mean if you can’t prove 5 teams in a year or 8 in two years think the Habs are divers, it’s hardly a league wide perception.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow. I didn’t say it, I provided video evidence. If you are denial about that simple fact then it calls into question everything else you say.
You want me to provide a statement from players around the league that Canadiens are divers. This is impossible and you know it, so I will ask you to provide statements from players around the league that the Canadiens are NOT divers. It would have the same amount of relevance.
How else can you quantify a “league wide” reputation then?
I can provide video of Chara/Pacioretty and it leads to wide varieties of opinion based on logo allegiance. Therefore video of events is flawed because bias leads one to see what one wants to see.
Quote after quote from players around the league complaining about the Canadiens diving is damning because it shows that there is a league wide perception. Wether or not we agree with the perception is irrelevant, you will have provided the proof that people believe and perceive the Habs as a team of divers.
Chris, as a peace offering, I am a goalie coach down here in Boston and it is refreshing to hear someone else say what I’ve been saying for years: Tim Thomas is not a very good goalie and there is no way the Bruins are going to win a Cup with him.
Technically he is one of the worst goalies in the league today. He tends to make up for a lot because he is so competitive but he is slowly being exposed by the Canadiens, who are simply throwing pucks at him, knowing he will give up rebounds and be forced to move laterally. He overplays the first shot so badly that he is almost always out of position for the rebound and his balance sucks.
Price is so superior in a technical sense that as long as MTL’s defense does its job in front of him he wil handle the first shot and is almost always in position for rebounds. The only time price gets in trouble is when he gets a little lazy (bored?). Then his technique yends to suffer and he has mental lapses like overplaying the puck behind his own net.
No need for peace offering. I am not mad.
I agree 100% with your Thomas assessment, the problem is that most people don’t care about technique, they care about highlight reels and statistical rankings.
No goaltender coach in the world will use Thomas to teach anything that he does except not to quit on a play. Once Brodeur and he retire, you will never see a goaltender like that in the NHL ever again, the science, math and logic behind positioning are too great.
Perhaps I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt by replying in a civilized manner when you continue to act like a fool. You came in here and made a claim. When your claim was brushed off you demanded other people show evidence that your claim was wrong.
Let me clue you into how the world of argumentation and logic works; when you make a claim, the burden of proof is on you to prove that claim. Just as the burden of proof is on the religious to prove the existence of their miracles or gods. The burden of proof is never on the skeptic until he/she makes a claim. That’s just the way it works.
If you don’t like it you’re free to concede our point and leave, otherwise step up and provide the proof under the incredibly soft stipulations I laid out.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure if I can provide anything more than video evidence. You are simply in denial. You over protest which is a clear sign of your insecurity. You have no case and have been exposed.
THE VIDEO DOESN’T LIE!
I declare victory on this one. Have a great day.
I take this as a concession that you couldn’t prove your own claims, and when confronted about it you ran away.
Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewberkshire
by Andrew Berkshire on Apr 19, 2011 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Late to the arguement
You certainly provided video. Not sure that biased youtube videos is evidence. Bruins and Leaf fans can post videos all day and label them dives, does not make it true.
by hab a good time on Apr 21, 2011 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks for the chats today guys…even though we differ on a few points ;) which from the colors of our glasses probably is the reason. Alas, I wont be in on anymore chats after tmrw for this season. I hope the rest of the series plays out well for the Bruins but they def have their work cut out for them.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Habs Eyes On The Prize
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
