|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 20, 2014 20:54:43 GMT -5
Discuss! "You haven't won anything yet!"
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Apr 20, 2014 21:07:09 GMT -5
Credit to the boys three straight games they are playing hard all over the ice...especially Eller Gionta and I must say Bourque...still would love Tinordi out there but so far so good...and this all wothot DD Vanek and patches scoring...they are due so hopefully they will carry the way next game. Subban has elevated his game as well.....need to finish the deed and get some rest.
Shocked they have played this well just because we usually have passengers which we have none and that includes the guys I mentioned above....I'm going to keep doubting them it seems to work.
Go Habs
HFTO
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Apr 20, 2014 21:08:26 GMT -5
Wow...what a night. I rushed through wsshing the cars, gobled dinner.....and went through the emotional wringer in the game!
All I know, it feels great to be a Habs fan right now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 21:09:42 GMT -5
Oh my [expletive] God was HNIC absolutely insufferable tonight. They spent way too much time complaining about the goal that was waived off (which I agree was questionable). Yet they happily ignored non-calls with Gallagher being slammed from behind, and Desharnais being tossed around by Stamkos.
Anyway, for Game 4: FOOT ON THE GAS
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 20, 2014 21:11:36 GMT -5
Nail biter finish.
Both our goals were the result of clear lapses. Briere's penalty, while a weakish call, shouldn't have happened. Refs are looking to single guys out in scrums. No penalty, no goal. The second goal was a result of not getting in a line change. Pleks' line did a great job hemming the Bolts in. Puck goes back up ice, and they're still on running around.
Aside from those two mistakes, I thought we did a lot of things well again. Breakouts with our top 4 defenders on were seamless almost every time. Neither pairing spent too much time in their own end. The third pair on the other hand ... well, breakouts died with them on the ice and we spent time running around almost every time they were on the ice. Not good when you have last change.
The powerless play is a disaster. Seriously. Mix up the 5 man units. Put a plugger, grinder, somebody on each group. Puck has to move faster, and someone has to shoot a few from the point. I don't care how much pressure they get on our D. Blast one off the shot blockers a few times. They'll get more and more timid.
It's great to be up 3-0. Not over yet, but the finish line (for this series) is in sight.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 20, 2014 21:12:09 GMT -5
If Vanek stops looking for the impossible pretty pass, the games wouldn't even be close
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Apr 20, 2014 21:17:00 GMT -5
Absolutely insuffarable. Worse ever. Even my wife was commenting about their anti Hab skew.
I don't like Rogers but I'm glad the CBC lost hockey. I hope Harper defunds them to the point they are nothing but a puppet show broadcaster.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Apr 20, 2014 21:18:52 GMT -5
Skilly have to agree he is way too fancy SHOOT the puck!..that lines needs to score with a serious old fashion crease crash
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Apr 20, 2014 21:22:07 GMT -5
Boys played well. If not for TB goalie we blow this thing wide open early. Only player who seemed off was Briere - looked like he was in mid-season form TB defensive zone coverage is awful. Can't believe how often our guys are all alone and right in front of the net. Don Maclean had a good explanation as to why the goal should have been disallowed. I accept it!
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Apr 20, 2014 21:28:12 GMT -5
Absolutely insuffarable. Worse ever. Even my wife was commenting about their anti Hab skew. I don't like Rogers but I'm glad the CBC lost hockey. I hope Harper defunds them to the point they are nothing but a puppet show broadcaster. CBC 3 stars were Bourque, Subban, and Stamkos (don't remember the order). Was pretty funny listening to Cherry after the game; going on about how the grinders like BGal never get the 3 star selections but are so critical to a winning team. Guess what Don? It's you morons at CBC who don't recognize BGal. He was the first star at the Bell Centre where it really matters. AND PK IS BACK!!! Played great at both ends of the ice!
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 20, 2014 21:28:29 GMT -5
To think the power play hurt the momentum there for taking in first period and the Habs played poor in the second period, it is nice to sit 3-0 in round one.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 20, 2014 21:28:49 GMT -5
The Motor City Madman is exactly that, but this song fits ...
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Apr 20, 2014 21:32:52 GMT -5
Now we need another complete game with ppg's and a nice safe lead so I can recharge the heart battery.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 20, 2014 21:38:21 GMT -5
One of my fave albums. I have the CD now.
Heard the explanation by MacLean and I'm still not sure if I understand the call. Regardless, I could care less. We've been getting a few calls go our way in the past few weeks and it's about time.
Not complaining about anything when we're up 3-0.
Subban!!
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 20, 2014 21:47:00 GMT -5
I think the last time we were up 3-0 in a series was in 1993 vs. the Islanders....
The last time we swept a series was also in 1993...vs. the Sabres.
Been a long time, man. Almost forgotten what that advantage feels like.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 20, 2014 22:13:10 GMT -5
I think the last time we were up 3-0 in a series was in 1993 vs. the Islanders.... The last time we swept a series was also in 1993...vs. the Sabres. Been a long time, man. Almost forgotten what that advantage feels like. Kinda sad lol. 3 series where a 2-0 lead ended in a 2-4 loss. Lots of back and forth series. One 3-1 comeback. A few upsets. Never a sweep. Never even a 3-0 lead in the last 20 years. You'd expect a desperate Bolts team Tuesday. Stamkos has been kept quiet since game one.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Apr 20, 2014 22:21:47 GMT -5
Total team effort...again.
Not over yet by any means, but boy it has been a fun ride so far!!
Killer instinct time for game 4.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 22:29:04 GMT -5
One of my fave albums. I have the CD now. Heard the explanation by MacLean and I'm still not sure if I understand the call. Regardless, I could care less. We've been getting a few calls go our way in the past few weeks and it's about time. Not complaining about anything when we're up 3-0. Subban!! Probably on the level of the Zibanejad kicked-in-not-kicked-in call from last season. I know if that went against us, the board would be fuming.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Apr 20, 2014 22:36:35 GMT -5
One of my fave albums. I have the CD now. Heard the explanation by MacLean and I'm still not sure if I understand the call. Regardless, I could care less. We've been getting a few calls go our way in the past few weeks and it's about time. Not complaining about anything when we're up 3-0. Subban!! As I understand it (from Ron Maclean who is a ref), when you look at the replay, as Kilhorn is trying to leave the crease, Carey tries to slide over but puts his skate down on Kilhorn's and loses his balance and falls over to the right and has difficulty regaining his position and getting back for the shot that goes in the net. No one is suggesting kilhorn did anything intentionally (no penalty) but fact is Carey was disturbed in HIS crease and affected his ability to be ready for the shot several several seconds later. If they called it a goal, i probably would not have complained (given Kilhorn looks to be doing everything to avoid contact and PK ain't helping him) but i can certainly see how the ref saw Carey being interfered with in HIS crease.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 20, 2014 23:44:19 GMT -5
So everything is hunky dorey in Habsville, but there are cracks showing and it's only the talent level on the Bolts that is keeping this train on its rails. Certainly we deserve to be up 3-0, but Therrien has to do something about a) the 3rd d pairing and b) the PP. The 3rd D pairing is easily fixed. Out goes Cube, in comes Tinordi. Therrien won't change a thing, but this is where he should actually be proactive. We can all see the issues with that pairing. We've been contained when that unit is on and it's not Weaver's fault. Cube has reversed directions when all the players are going up toward the TB net and we end up cooped up in our end. We know he can't handle a number of games in a row, but Therrien will play it 'safe', when really he's taking more risk with Cube. It's not a big deal. Changing one guy isn't going to throw the chemistry out of whack. He gets a bigger, tougher guy who is going to discourage some of the Tampa hitting, and he'll help develop a young kid for a potentially more important game later this year, and he'll give Cube a rest, so he's got more energy in the next game when you can switch him back in. I'd rotate the two.
The PP is a more difficult creature to repair, but he should try simplifying things. Get some new blood who aren't afraid to block the goalie's view, and just throw pucks toward the net. Have guys sitting to the side, like DD on his goal the other day, and work the tips. Once Tampa's been softened up, PK and Markov can start bombing from the point again. Don't play the DD line 75% of the PP. It can't be that difficult and I've seen a ton of suffering PP's get healthy by simplification.
This series would be much closer with Bishop in net. Lindback has made 'some' good saves, but he's let in some awful goals at the worst times too. Thank god he's Tampa's only real option. We also didn't finish our checks nearly well enough. Simple improvements to make.
On the other hand, we competed hard, especially DD and Gallagher. It looks like there's a real property ownership battle going on between Desharhais and Hedman. Hedman must not have taken the criticism that DD 'owned' him in the first game and he seems to be adding more than usual to his battles with DD. Davey is still winning his share, though. I think he's been really, really good. Vanek and Patches owe him a lot.
Gallagher continues to be the Energizer Bunny and his goal was well earned and a terrific shot. They are shooting up on Lindback and its going in.
I still marvel at how far Tampa has gone with that defense and with that entire lineup in general. I like Purcell and Filppula, CAllahan and Palat. Stamkos is a super star, of course and Killorn is ok, but everyone else is marginal and I don't think they'd make any line on the Habs. Even the guys I've mentioned, while appreciated, are hardly the kind to make you think, "Oh yeah, 3rd place Conference team". I'd have said they'd struggle to make the playoffs. And if Bishop has a so-so year next year, they will struggle to make the playoffs. It's just not an inspiring lineup, so while I'm glade we're up 3-0, it's not as if I think it's a terrific achievement. Why did we have such trouble with them during the season? (I know, it took Emelin almost the whole season to get healthy, we didnt have Vanek, Weise or Weaver (the VW's) for much of that time (though we did in the final game against them), so I don't get it.
One more to go against these guys. Please, MT, give Booboo a rest, make some minor tweaks to the PP and let's get a 5 or 6 goal win to send Tampa home speedily.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 20, 2014 23:58:00 GMT -5
Agree wholeheartedly about DD. His compete level has been fantastic. He's doing to Hedman what he did to Chara in 2011. He's getting underneath him, attacking his footwork, playing him hard. Keep it up. Hedman is their best defender, and he's looked average.
I think game four is the right time to give Cube a rest. Will it happen? Unlikely. You don't change a winning lineup. *rollseyes*
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Apr 21, 2014 0:41:20 GMT -5
Hard to believe that BGal could be such a dominant force and get 1st star with only 12 mins TOI. Gotta luv the kid!
On the other hand the 3rd D pairing had about the same TOI and they are the great equalizer. Panic in our own end and lose momentum. Seems to me if I'm MT and i don't have the confidence to give them more TOI, then I should go with Tinordi and give him a chance even if it's only 10 minutes. At least you know he's there for the rough stuff. But as has been said, there isn't a hope in hell MT changes anything. I guess the hope is we sweep and the old legs then get a rest. But it is a double pick up to play Tinordi: get him much needed experience and rest Booboo.
Don't know how Stamkos played after the clear concussion. He was very wobbly. Give him credit but you have to wonder about this 'quiet time' rule.
The TB D is really pathetic - slow and always out of position. i thought Hedman hd a great season and had really developed into the top dman he was drafted as, but he has been dreadful this series.
Now PK has been amazing. True Norris stuff. The main thing is that it would appear that MT hasn't ruined the kid, yet. I was getting concerned but he's had a stellar series. He is also no nonsense in his interviews now; very serious and stern. MT has definitely taken the fun out of the kid. I preferred the old Magic Johnson personality. The interviews used to be a lot of fun. Now it's all cliche - it's the win that matters and it's all about the next game, blah, blah, blah. But at least he's playing like a star.
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on Apr 21, 2014 6:50:27 GMT -5
Hard to believe that BGal could be such a dominant force and get 1st star with only 12 mins TOI. Gotta luv the kid! On the other hand the 3rd D pairing had about the same TOI and they are the great equalizer. Panic in our own end and lose momentum. Seems to me if I'm MT and i don't have the confidence to give them more TOI, then I should go with Tinordi and give him a chance even if it's only 10 minutes. At least you know he's there for the rough stuff. But as has been said, there isn't a hope in hell MT changes anything. I guess the hope is we sweep and the old legs then get a rest. But it is a double pick up to play Tinordi: get him much needed experience and rest Booboo. Don't know how Stamkos played after the clear concussion. He was very wobbly. Give him credit but you have to wonder about this 'quiet time' rule. The TB D is really pathetic - slow and always out of position. i thought Hedman hd a great season and had really developed into the top dman he was drafted as, but he has been dreadful this series. Now PK has been amazing. True Norris stuff. The main thing is that it would appear that MT hasn't ruined the kid, yet. I was getting concerned but he's had a stellar series. He is also no nonsense in his interviews now; very serious and stern. MT has definitely taken the fun out of the kid. I preferred the old Magic Johnson personality. The interviews used to be a lot of fun. Now it's all cliche - it's the win that matters and it's all about the next game, blah, blah, blah. But at least he's playing like a star. Heard that Stamkos told trainers that he wanted to go back out, but he had headaches. I would be surprised and appalled to see him in the next game. I understand the urgency of the game, but the odd ARE stacked against them. The risk is too grand. Imagine a Crosby type injury to Stamkos. Hard decision to make. Subban, he has returned. What a play to set up Gallagher. Made the TB coverage look like a bunch of fools. Stretch pass on the first goal.....beauty. All we need id for him to line up Callahan while he's entering the zone. Show him that this is HIS house and he will have none of this running around Callahan has been doing. I don't see why we can't have Tinordi instead of Bouillon. We are not winning because of him, we are winning in spite of him. Tinordi is just as tough, but a better skater and puck handler than Frankie. I've seen Tinoordi skate the puck out. I can also see him linning Palat up on the TB blue line during a break out. BAM
|
|
|
Post by Gogie on Apr 21, 2014 8:00:03 GMT -5
Following is the relevant rule re goaltender interference. I've highlighted what I believe Ron McLean was referring to in his explanation agreeing with the call. I think the key is the last highlighted section - if a goaltender initiates contact with an opposing player in his crease while trying to establish position any resulting goal will be diallowed. McLean or someone on the panel pointed out that Price made a very smart play by deliberately making contact with theTB player as he was going to his left, hence effetively negating any goal that might follow during that scramble. The rule is what it is - the goalie has the right to establish position within his crease and if he is hindered from establishing his position by an opposition player than any resulting goal will be disallowed. You might argue that the TB player was forced into the crease by a Canadien (I'm pretty sure this wasn't the case - he was driving to the net on his own) or you may argue that Subban prevented him from vacating the crease (if he did, I don't believe it was deliberate as he was trying to get out of the way himself and in any event the TB player had the responsibility to avoid the crease in the first place). I'm pretty comfortable with the call, all bias aside.
Rule 69 - Interference on the Goalkeeper
69.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgment of the Referee(s), and not by means of video replay or review.
For purposes of this rule, “contact,” whether incidental or otherwise, shall mean any contact that is made between or among a goalkeeper and attacking player(s), whether by means of a stick or any part of the body.
The overriding rationale of this rule is that a goalkeeper should have the ability to move freely within his goal crease without being hindered by the actions of an attacking player. If an attacking player enters the goal crease and, by his actions, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.
If an attacking player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by a defending player so as to cause him to come into contact with the goalkeeper, such contact will not be deemed contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.
If a defending player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by an attacking player so as to cause the defending player to come into contact with his own goalkeeper, such contact shall be deemed contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, and if necessary a penalty assessed to the attacking player and if a goal is scored it would be disallowed.
69.3 Contact Inside the Goal Crease - If an attacking player initiates contact with a goalkeeper, incidental or otherwise, while the goalkeeper is in his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.
If a goalkeeper, in the act of establishing his position within his goal crease, initiates contact with an attacking player who is in the goal crease, and this results in an impairment of the goalkeeper’s ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.
If, after any contact by a goalkeeper who is attempting to establish position in his goal crease, the attacking player does not immediately vacate his current position in the goal crease (i.e. give ground to the goalkeeper), and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. In all such cases, whether or not a goal is scored, the attacking player will receive a minor penalty for goalkeeper interference.
If an attacking player establishes a significant position within the goal crease, so as to obstruct the goalkeeper’s vision and impair his ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.
For this purpose, a player “establishes a significant position within the crease” when, in the Referee’s judgment, his body, or a substantial portion thereof, is within the goal crease for more than an instantaneous period of time.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Apr 21, 2014 8:21:04 GMT -5
Kerry Fraser on TSN also said it was a non-goal.
Great game by the boys....Subban is a monster out there.....they can't stop him. Hard to believe our 3rd line has been our best line this whole series!! Keep it up boys!!
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 21, 2014 8:49:51 GMT -5
Don't know how Stamkos played after the clear concussion. He was very wobbly. Give him credit but you have to wonder about this 'quiet time' rule. Heard that Stamkos told trainers that he wanted to go back out, but he had headaches. I would be surprised and appalled to see him in the next game. I understand the urgency of the game, but the odd ARE stacked against them. The risk is too grand. Imagine a Crosby type injury to Stamkos. Hard decision to make. ya, so much for the "concussion protocol". your trainer is worried for you when he's taking you off the ice but then loses his worry because you say you want to play? "How many fingers am I holding up? Umm, try again. OK, close enough."
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on Apr 21, 2014 8:53:58 GMT -5
Kerry Fraser on TSN also said it was a non-goal. Great game by the boys....Subban is a monster out there.....they can't stop him. Hard to believe our 3rd line has been our best line this whole series!! Keep it up boys!! Thats what happens when you have a first line like the one we have. You put your (best?) defense men against them. Then you have Gudas and Brewer to defend our other two offensive lines. When we have our fourth line contributing as well, TB has no answer. Very fun to watch these guys play this way. Hope Stamkos is ok, I hate seeing a poayer fall to injury, especially someone like Stamkos. Mackenzie said that in a perfect world, Stamkos should not have returned to the game. Clea\r knee to the head, he was dazed. Had a headache. I would be surprised to see him in the lineup tomorrow. The NHL has strict rules to this regard.
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on Apr 21, 2014 9:06:35 GMT -5
Heard that Stamkos told trainers that he wanted to go back out, but he had headaches. I would be surprised and appalled to see him in the next game. I understand the urgency of the game, but the odd ARE stacked against them. The risk is too grand. Imagine a Crosby type injury to Stamkos. Hard decision to make. ya, so much for the "concussion protocol". your trainer is worried for you when he's taking you off the ice but then loses his worry because you say you want to play? "How many fingers am I holding up? Umm, try again. OK, close enough." In the trainers defense, Stamkos probably passed the initial tests. Maybe he omitted that he had a headache. IMO, any play where the player gets hit and stays on thie ice, visibly shaken, doesn't come back. Gets re-evaluated the next day. Not only did he stay on the ice, he went down on one knee trying to get to the bench.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 21, 2014 9:56:47 GMT -5
Re: RULE 69. (And let me be the first to say this rule is appropriately numbered)
It doesn't matter if Killorn was pushed into the net. (I believe he was) because the rule was not invoked based on that act. The ref let the play continue so he wasn't calling that act either.
It doesn't matter if Subban held Killorn in the crease. Again it had no bearing on the play. Price was to the right when this occurred, it never impeded him.
The ONLY act that matters, it that when Price tried to establish position coming to his left he made contact with Killorn. This contact caused him to fall, which impeded him getting back to his right.
It didn't matter if it was intentional or accidental contact. Did Price sell it? SURE. But that's the rule as written.
He has used the rule to his advantage several times this year, I'm not sure it's a strategy I want him employing all the time, cause some refs (Peel, Lee) won't call it for Price.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Apr 21, 2014 11:44:16 GMT -5
All the TB team is going on about how disappointed they are as that was their best game of the series. May have been their best game but they were not the best team on the ice. Lindback had to play great to keep TB in it, TB had few quality scoring chances and Price was not even a star. Simply put: their best is not good enough. Next!
|
|