|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 12, 2002 22:03:44 GMT -5
Nice effort trying to comeback but the 1st really cost us the game.
The 3rd was great though. Too bad we couldn't tie it.
No shame in losing to an elite team like Dallas. We should have just come out with a better effort...
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 12, 2002 22:05:28 GMT -5
BTW weird moves by MT tonight 1st...at the end of the game Traverse and Rivet on the ice...wtf? where was Brisebois and Markov? then Theo comes out and he sends Gilmour on the ice...another weird move.. we had a PP right after a commercial break in the 3rd and he comes out with Perreault-Gilmour-McKay who stay on the ice for well over a minute... alot of moves tonight..plus Audette getting all kinds of ice time down the stretch and doing not much with it. The guy can't shoot and it's obvious.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 12, 2002 22:39:43 GMT -5
submitted without comment:
Markov: 18:42 ice time,2:41 PP time
Traverse: 21:54 ice time, 3:19 PP time
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Nov 12, 2002 22:59:25 GMT -5
BTW weird moves by MT tonight 1st...at the end of the game Traverse and Rivet on the ice...wtf? where was Brisebois and Markov? Markov and Brisebois had played the full two minutes before that, and came off, winded, with about 1:30 left. We of course, didn't have any timeouts to let them get their breath back. After that, the played just ran more or less until the end of the game. then Theo comes out and he sends Gilmour on the ice...another weird move.. Just going with his alleged offensive players. then Theo comes out and he sends Gilmour on the ice...another weird move.. we had a PP right after a commercial break in the 3rd and he comes out with Perreault-Gilmour-McKay who stay on the ice for well over a minute... Ditto the previous point. alot of moves tonight..plus Audette getting all kinds of ice time down the stretch and doing not much with it. The guy can't shoot and it's obvious. They were just trying to get him going. Again, down by three, they needed offense, Audette was dressed, you gotta use him. If you aren't going to use him in a pure offensive situation, then when are you going to use him?
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Nov 12, 2002 23:25:12 GMT -5
I watched carefully tonite trying to be objective and maybe positive too.
Lots of guys were working hard. Koivu, Zed, Petrov, Dackell, Gilmour. (Petrov reminds me of the ant trying to push a steamroller uphill, good effort but limited results.) When Dallas kept the puck in the corners of our zone, our defensemen just bounced off their forwards. Dallas controlled the puck and we poked at it to try to get it away from them. I watched Theo play two perfect periods to keep it close. I may have to check the stats, but I think we were outshot. (Again) MT, is there a pattern? The guys in the green jerseys skate faster than the guys in the white shirts. They don't necessarily work harder, but they may be faster skaters and better players too. The fact that they are better players is not MT's fault! On their powerplays Dallas appeared to have set plays, positions, and patterns to follow. On our powerplays we didn't. This is MT's fault. Good effort, a little something to cheer about, but a loss just the same. Kissing my sister is better than a loss. Still a fan and looking forward to the next game. That kinda sums it all up! Don't save me a place at Peel and St. Catherine to watch the parade this year. I may not be the only one not there.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Nov 13, 2002 0:47:20 GMT -5
Besides expansion teams can you really recall a team being outshot by such wide margins every single night.If its not bad starts they run out of gas they are very frustrating. One or 11/2 periods just doesn't cut it. HFTO
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 13, 2002 8:27:24 GMT -5
if it cheers you up, Columbus gave up 50+ shots to Colorado last night
|
|
|
Post by HabBoy on Nov 13, 2002 11:13:52 GMT -5
Doesnt cheer me up, Columbus is CRAP! Well, then again, the Habs looked like Saperlipopette the first dperiod last night, especially little Theo, gosh he is looking so small, and floppy. Bad positioning to boot.
Therrien has lost touch, give him till Xmas, maybe thats too long?
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Nov 13, 2002 11:52:14 GMT -5
Doesnt cheer me up, Columbus is Saperlipopette! Well, then again, the Habs looked like Saperlipopette the first dperiod last night, especially little Theo, gosh he is looking so small, and floppy. Bad positioning to boot. Therrien has lost touch, give him till Xmas, maybe thats too long? Link removed by DocHi, Just wanna tell you can't post direct link to other post board. You can refer to them by saying so and so said this and that but you can't post links or invitation to other post board; that's traffic redirection. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by HabBoy on Nov 13, 2002 11:57:36 GMT -5
yeah sure **yawns** whatever
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 13, 2002 17:02:33 GMT -5
it's in the code of conduct...
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 13, 2002 21:03:22 GMT -5
yeah sure **yawns** whatever It's actually referred to as "Netiquette." As MPLABBE referred to, and as I asked you to in an earlier post, was please read the Code of Conduct post on the main board. Please don't feel that we're not singling you out. The moderators of the board try to welcome everyone in the same way. All Doc was doing was what is in accordance with his responsibilities as a moderator. Nothing more, buds. Anyway, good posting to you. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 13, 2002 21:17:18 GMT -5
I think Michael Whalen summed it up pretty well guys. He said this morning that the Habs had no business being in the same rink as the Stars last night. The Stars were the better team by far.
Now, it's on to a home-at-home with the Devils.
I'll mention my concern again. I know it's early in the season, but we just don't compete against the elite teams. Sure, we beat the Wings, but until we can at least show up for these games, our goaltenders will continue to be our best players.
What are you going to do? Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 13, 2002 21:30:06 GMT -5
yeah it looks like we are so impressed by the talent on those teams we watch them play instead of competing against them..
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 13, 2002 21:32:50 GMT -5
I think Michael Whalen summed it up pretty well guys. He said this morning that the Habs had no business being in the same rink as the Stars last night. The Stars were the better team by far. Now, it's on to a home-at-home with the Devils. I'll mention my concern again. I know it's early in the season, but we just don't compete against the elite teams. Sure, we beat the Wings, but until we can at least show up for these games, our goaltenders will continue to be our best players. What are you going to do? Cheers. I don't buy it. The stars are a very good team. They are a great 1st period team, then the 2nd and 3rd they are not so good. We didn't show up in the first, thus we got hammered by the best 1st period team in hockey. (+14 goal difference in the 1st for Dallas) But we had chances to get back in. Juneau had a open net that he missed, plus we had some PP chances that were close. We got shelled, came back and almost tied it. But I wouldn't say that we didn't belong in the rink. What if we got a lucky bounced and tied it? Would people still say that we didn't belong when the score was 3-3? Yes we didn't look good, but to me it was an average team playing one of the top teams in the league, that was not mentally prepared for the game, but they didn't mail it in after the first which the game was all but over. They hung in there, and made a game of it. And I don't have a problem with our teams best player being our goalie, it's hard not to, when your goalie is the league MVP.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 13, 2002 22:04:28 GMT -5
Good points, Montreal. I saw the highlights of the chances you mentioned and, well, what can you say; we didn't cash in. Also, if the shots on goal were any indication, it took us a while to get going. The shots on goal were:
Dallas 11 16 6 Montreal 6 6 11
I didn't see the game, but when I look at the SOG, it tells me that territorially at least, the first two periods belonged to the Stars. I don't know for sure, but could it be that by the time we got around to establishing our game, it was too late?
Anyway, I don't doubt what you're saying. We probably played "alright" late in the game and if we had the odd bounce it could have been different. But, that's just with the Stars. Generally, I've seen some of the big games we were supposed to be ready for and, honestly, these guys just weren't up to the task. OK, we beat up on the Leafs; that's like a Cup to some. Detroit was nice to see. But, getting beaten rather convincingly by the established teams doesn't give me a warm fuzzy.
We can harp all we want on coaching, but we still don't have that one player that can stand up in the dressing room, grab these guys by the short-and-curleys and then back it up on the ice.
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 13, 2002 22:11:52 GMT -5
If it makes you fell any better a tired Stars team playing in their 2nd game in 2 nights blasted a well rested Caps team tonight 6-1.
Dallas have an unreal team talent wise. They could very well win the west if guys like Arnott, Turgeon and Young step it up.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 14, 2002 1:34:37 GMT -5
Good points, Montreal. I saw the highlights of the chances you mentioned and, well, what can you say; we didn't cash in. Also, if the shots on goal were any indication, it took us a while to get going. The shots on goal were: Dallas 11 16 6 Montreal 6 6 11 I didn't see the game, but when I look at the SOG, it tells me that territorially at least, the first two periods belonged to the Stars. I don't know for sure, but could it be that by the time we got around to establishing our game, it was too late? Anyway, I don't doubt what you're saying. We probably played "alright" late in the game and if we had the odd bounce it could have been different. But, that's just with the Stars. Generally, I've seen some of the big games we were supposed to be ready for and, honestly, these guys just weren't up to the task. OK, we beat up on the Leafs; that's like a Cup to some. Detroit was nice to see. But, getting beaten rather convincingly by the established teams doesn't give me a warm fuzzy. We can harp all we want on coaching, but we still don't have that one player that can stand up in the dressing room, grab these guys by the short-and-curleys and then back it up on the ice. Cheers. Well I did see the game, and it went downhill fast. Chow gets a penalty they score on a goal that was not soft, but somehow Theo MUST find a way to stop these. He didn't look confident in the first, and our defence wasn't any better. Brezzy has been our best defencemen, but he made some bad plays that night. Traverse has played well, but it wasn't his night either. As for the game, it was all stars in the first, but we started good in the 2nd, but didn't keep it up. Then we got going in the 3rd or Dallas was already planning the nights activities. But our 5 losses, 4 are blow outs. 2 to Philly (they done that to a lot of teams already), blues (which we sent way to much time in the box) and somehow the Sabers, with the Stars being a good game for 10 minutes or so.
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Nov 14, 2002 7:05:55 GMT -5
I disagree. Vehemntly. Theo let in three goals Tuesday night and only on the final one did he have any chance at all. The first was a screen shot that was tipped in front. Add to that the fact that there were two Montreal defenders standing right alongside the screen doing absolutely nothing.
Just before the second he was plowed into by Karl Dykhuis - perhaps not so much as bonehead defensive move as an accident with a nasty consequence. Still, Karl should have been ready to even dive out of the way and do everything he could to avoid Theo. He wasn't, he didn't - and so Malhotra had an open net gaping before him.
The third and final goal was stoppable. After all, the Montreal defence just let Arnott cruise through the crease - there was no screen, and it wasn't so much tipped as redirected. He could've had it. Maybe. But I certainly don't fault him for any of those goals. What we need is to get a competant defensive corps who can do more than bounce off opposing forwards.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 14, 2002 7:20:50 GMT -5
On the first one Theodore said Guerin blocked his view of the shot. He had no idea Zubov released it from the point.
|
|
|
Post by HabBoy on Nov 14, 2002 10:46:13 GMT -5
As usual, on the first goal, Theo had flopped onto his knees, and he didnt know there was a shot???!!! The second, Theo simply flopped again, way outta position, which he does alot. The third was a defensive gaff, but, Theo had NO position in the net and was basically flat footed, no chance.
A good positional goalie like JEFF HACKETT woulda stopped 2 outta 3 of those goals.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 14, 2002 10:53:51 GMT -5
yeah he didn't know there was a shot coming because 6'4' Bill Guerin was allowed by our soft as a pillow defence to stand in front of the net while Zubov was releasing a shot
and on the 2nd goal even if he was in position we were in trouble because 2 STARS WERE ALL ALONE IN FRONT OF THE NET. A bunch of Habs were LAZY on the play.
|
|
|
Post by Ged on Nov 14, 2002 11:00:40 GMT -5
Theodore had a bad night. Every puck that hit him in the first period bounced off him directly into the slot. The score should have been 6-0 after the first. To his credit he somehow completely turned it around for the next two periods, but the damage was done.
Brisebois had a bad night. His pinch was the cause of the first goal. And on the third, he was floating towards Turgeon, as the puck ripped between his motionless feet and on to the stick of Arnott.
It was mentioned Brisebois has been our best D. Not so. Markov, hands down has been the best defenceman with Quintal and Dykhuis being the worst.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 14, 2002 19:13:01 GMT -5
I disagree. Vehemntly. Theo let in three goals Tuesday night and only on the final one did he have any chance at all. The first was a screen shot that was tipped in front. Add to that the fact that there were two Montreal defenders standing right alongside the screen doing absolutely nothing. Just before the second he was plowed into by Karl Dykhuis - perhaps not so much as bonehead defensive move as an accident with a nasty consequence. Still, Karl should have been ready to even dive out of the way and do everything he could to avoid Theo. He wasn't, he didn't - and so Malhotra had an open net gaping before him. The third and final goal was stoppable. After all, the Montreal defence just let Arnott cruise through the crease - there was no screen, and it wasn't so much tipped as redirected. He could've had it. Maybe. But I certainly don't fault him for any of those goals. What we need is to get a competant defensive corps who can do more than bounce off opposing forwards. Theo was fighting the puck, and was not in good position. He looked shaky and wheter he could or couldn't have saved any of them doesn't matter. He didn't, and must find a way to make those saves. There's a reason why his GAA and save % suck, cause he hasn't been playing well, just like there's a reason why Hackett's Gaa and save % are good, cause he is playing with great confidence. Theo has to find a way to get back his confidence and form, or it will be a long season for him and us fans.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 14, 2002 19:18:39 GMT -5
Theodore had a bad night. Every puck that hit him in the first period bounced off him directly into the slot. The score should have been 6-0 after the first. To his credit he somehow completely turned it around for the next two periods, but the damage was done. Brisebois had a bad night. His pinch was the cause of the first goal. And on the third, he was floating towards Turgeon, as the puck ripped between his motionless feet and on to the stick of Arnott. It was mentioned Brisebois has been our best D. Not so. Markov, hands down has been the best defenceman with Quintal and Dykhuis being the worst. I don't agree at all. Brisebois is our best defencemen, and a bad game here or there doesn't change that. Markov is off to a great start, but Brezzy's still the man. When we play the Pens and Super Mario, who would you rather have out there when Mario is on the ice? Well it doesn't matter, cause it will be Brezzy. He has the experience that Markov still needs to get. I think down the road, Markov will be better but he's not there yet.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 14, 2002 19:35:43 GMT -5
Theo has to find a way to get back his confidence and form, or it will be a long season for him and us fans. and the only way to do that is by giving him 10-15 starts in arrow it looks like...*sigh* this goaltending situation must drive the org nuts sometimes..
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Nov 15, 2002 9:01:52 GMT -5
That's way off base. He was fighting the (just noticed my typo here and changed it. Sorry if I insulted anyone) puck? He needs to regain form? Nope - I'm sorry. I didn't see that on Tuesday. I saw a netminder who was peppered with shots and forced to stand on his head to keep his team in the game.
Look at the stats - he gave up 3 goals on 33 shots. That's about a .909 SV%. In comparison to other NHL regulars (who have played more than 5 games), if he repeated that performance every night he's he'd be sixteenth in the league. Not a fantastic position to be in, but lets not forget we were playing the Dallas Stars - a team tied for first in a strong western conference and a team Shooting% of 0.112 (in other words - had Theodore been merely an average goalie, he would've had a SV% of .888). When you add in that no one could've made the save on the second goal after being plowed into by your defenceman (who also left two Stars alone in the slot) his save percentage jumps again to .939, which is exactly on par with what he should be getting.
Like it or not there are some saves that a goalie can't make. When you've got a monster like Guein standing in front of you unimpeded by your two lazy/frightened defenceman on the PK, there's no way you can react in time to make the stop - you just got to hope for the puck to find you. No goalie in the league makes that kinda stop - they get lucky sometimes, but none of them make it.
It's all too easy to blame the goalie, to say that this is wrong with his technique, that he's not playing up to form. But when the cards are down, Theo is performing. Had a merely average goalie been playing Tuesday the score would've been 4 or 5 to 2 before the empty netter. He'd playing his heart out. But he's getting nothing from anyone else on the team (save a few like Juneau, Bulis, Dackell, Koivu, Markov etc).
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 15, 2002 18:24:00 GMT -5
That's way off base. He was fighting the (just noticed my typo here and changed it. Sorry if I insulted anyone) puck? He needs to regain form? Nope - I'm sorry. I didn't see that on Tuesday. I saw a netminder who was peppered with shots and forced to stand on his head to keep his team in the game. Look at the stats - he gave up 3 goals on 33 shots. That's about a .909 SV%. In comparison to other NHL regulars (who have played more than 5 games), if he repeated that performance every night he's he'd be sixteenth in the league. Not a fantastic position to be in, but lets not forget we were playing the Dallas Stars - a team tied for first in a strong western conference and a team Shooting% of 0.112 (in other words - had Theodore been merely an average goalie, he would've had a SV% of .888). When you add in that no one could've made the save on the second goal after being plowed into by your defenceman (who also left two Stars alone in the slot) his save percentage jumps again to .939, which is exactly on par with what he should be getting. Like it or not there are some saves that a goalie can't make. When you've got a monster like Guein standing in front of you unimpeded by your two lazy/frightened defenceman on the PK, there's no way you can react in time to make the stop - you just got to hope for the puck to find you. No goalie in the league makes that kinda stop - they get lucky sometimes, but none of them make it. It's all too easy to blame the goalie, to say that this is wrong with his technique, that he's not playing up to form. But when the cards are down, Theo is performing. Had a merely average goalie been playing Tuesday the score would've been 4 or 5 to 2 before the empty netter. He'd playing his heart out. But he's getting nothing from anyone else on the team (save a few like Juneau, Bulis, Dackell, Koivu, Markov etc). Well its nice to spin it your way. As Theo did give up 3 on 33, but thats not the true story here. When I said he was fighting the puck (he was and has been) look at the 1st period. What did they have 11 shots and he let in 3 on those? Yes he did bounce back in the 2nd and 3rd, but he has not been playing like the Theo from last year. On the 1st goal, he went down to early. 2nd goal was Dykhuis plowing into him. And, IMO he should of had the 3rd goal. Either way you spin it, Theo has not been good. He has been in nets for every single lose we have, and he has gotten shelled in those games not looking sharp at all. He is going down to early, he's been out of position and off his angles. He's not coming out far enough to face the shooters, and when he does, he gets caught cheating. I support Theo all the way, he's a great young goalie, and the teams future lies with him. But no way no how, can anyone tell me what I am cleary seeing with my own eyes. Theo is not sharp, and for the most part has not played good. Yes he does seem to be turning it around, as his play has gotten better, and so have his results/stats, but he's still shaky and does not seem to have the confidence of last year, and he also seems to have the problem of giving up a soft goal, which he has done every year until last season.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 15, 2002 18:27:23 GMT -5
people the 3rd shot was a tip in to the top corner...on his stick side...the Theodore of last year doesn't get that one for sure...
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 15, 2002 18:43:42 GMT -5
people the 3rd shot was a tip in to the top corner...on his stick side...the Theodore of last year doesn't get that one for sure... I thought that the 3rd goal was the one Traverse just let his guy walk in. The first goal was the tip in front on the PP (thanks Chow) which Theo went down to early. The 2nd goal was when Dykhuis knocked over Theo, and Manny had the open net, and the 3rd was when it went through Brezzy legs and Traverse just watched him in go in Theo, who has to make 1 or 2 of these no matter what.
|
|