|
|
Post by franko on Apr 26, 2018 21:51:47 GMT -5
I may have to adjust my thoughts . . . I figured Fleury would crash and burn by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 26, 2018 22:16:44 GMT -5
The Knights' passing is pinpoint tonight. No loss in the speed of execution when the passing is accurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Apr 27, 2018 6:52:23 GMT -5
The Knights' passing is pinpoint tonight. No loss in the speed of execution when the passing is accurate. Well coached team. |
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Apr 27, 2018 7:02:15 GMT -5
I keep expecting the bubble to burst. Maybe it won’t.
I also keep expecting the Caps to finally be able to beat the Pens. Maybe they won’t either.
An unmitigated disaster for the playoff pool last night!! Good thing it is only game one.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 27, 2018 7:26:14 GMT -5
I keep expecting the bubble to burst. I also keep expecting the Caps to finally be able to beat the Pens. An unmitigated disaster for the playoff pool last night!! Good thing it is only game one. uhhh . . . yup. |
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Apr 27, 2018 11:21:06 GMT -5
Watching the playoffs and I have to say the skill level on display is very high. The Bruins=Leafs series alone shows how far off we are. Boston has great depth up front - the old core of Bergeron, Marchand and Krejci is still playing at a high level and now Pastrnak is a legit top 6 guy, DeBrusk looks like a real keeper, and then vets like Backes and Nash. Their D is pretty weak but they have two of the better puck movers in Krug and McAvoy (who has looked like a rookie in the series). The Leafs have top picks all over the ice... but man what a GAG job in the 3rd period. Toronto fans are such homers, but I'd be pissed as a Leafs fan. Yes, they are young and talented but that's 2 straight 1st round exits, and they just fell apart last night. I'm sure they will spin it as a learning experience, but they were clearly the better team for 40 minutes before totally crapping their pants. Not a good way to end the year. Overall, this is the best the NHL has looked in years. The first round series have been highly competitive and there are quite a few teams that are legit threats. I can see any one of TB, BOS, WSH, PIT emerging out of the East, and Preds-Jets could be an epic series. I just can't believe Vegas will get much farther, but I was shocked when they swept the Kings. The Sharks/Knights series should be good too. The NHL is great, scoring is up, great matchups....Sad that we aren't a part of it. The NHL talks about parity but these 8 teams are arguably the best teams in the NHL this year. I know Toronto had a better record but the division was so weak so it was artificially inflated. If Thorton doesn't get hurt the Sharks are better than the Ducks. So in the end there were no real surprises. Should make for a real fun and entertaining second round. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 27, 2018 21:54:04 GMT -5
Holy Hellebuyck!
Can Nashville play any better?
Reminded me of the Habs facing Ryan Miller's Sabres.
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Apr 27, 2018 22:39:54 GMT -5
Total domination, except in net. Wowza. This series is going to be a beauty.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 28, 2018 0:58:19 GMT -5
The Vegas identity is speed.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 28, 2018 9:56:59 GMT -5
The Vegas identity is speed. Yep, if you're not ready out of the gate, good luck...their amp is turned to 11. That's how the Preds came out last night....but Hellebuyck had every answer.... |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Apr 28, 2018 19:38:42 GMT -5
Bruins score 3 in the 3rd & win 6-2 over TB. 11 points for the big line.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 28, 2018 23:09:45 GMT -5
Goaltending interference was called on a goal in OT in the SJ-LV game ... Marshesault ran into the shaft of the goalies stick, spinning him around, Cherry, and MacLean claim it wasn't the stick contact that was interference but contact with the skate and the situation room confirmed that was so ....I call BS ....the replay on my TV clearly shows it was the San Jose defenseman who contacted Jones' skate AFTER Marshensault banged into the stick.
MacLean claiming that it shouldn't be interference if it was the stick, because a poke check is not interference. And MacLean is suppose to be a ref ... FFS.
Then he goes on to say it was out of the blue crease ....goaltender interference does not matter if you are in the blue paint or not. The only difference is incidental contact versus intentional, that's what the blue paint is for
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 28, 2018 23:25:19 GMT -5
Goaltending interference was called on a goal in OT in the SJ-LV game ... Marshesault ran into the shaft of the goalies stick, spinning him around, Cherry, and MacLean claim it wasn't the stick contact that was interference but contact with the skate and the situation room confirmed that was so ....I call BS ....the replay on my TV clearly shows it was the San Jose defenseman who contacted Jones' skate AFTER Marshensault banged into the stick. MacLean claiming that it shouldn't be interference if it was the stick, because a poke check is not interference. And MacLean is suppose to be a ref ... FFS. Then he goes on to say it was out of the blue crease ....goaltender interference does not matter if you are in the blue paint or not. The only difference is incidental contact versus intentional, that's what the blue paint is for Cherry's sniffing glue. No contact with Jones' skate. I still don't like the call. Marchessault should be as entitled to the white ice as Jones is to the blue. Was over after that. VGK had no legs in the second OT. Sharks were all over them and drew two PPs, scoring on the second. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 29, 2018 1:15:33 GMT -5
I still don't like the call. Marchessault should be as entitled to the white ice as Jones is to the blue. Was over after that. VGK had no legs in the second OT. Sharks were all over them and drew two PPs, scoring on the second. Sharks used Vlasic, Braun and Burns a LOT in the game. Burns played almost 37 minutes, Braun played 35 and Vlasic 37 minutes. Pavelski, their best forward, played 32. Couture and Meier played 27. Those are their best players and there is a risk to overplaying them. Besides the risk of injury, there is simply fatigue and the probability of mistakes goes way up. Just before Couture scored, I saw Vlasic labouring to get to the bench. If the Knights can keep up the pace and make those key players work hard every shift, their better balance is going to win out in the end. Unless the Sharks have a large amount of luck, of course, because luck trumps everything. |
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Apr 29, 2018 2:11:41 GMT -5
I picked the Sharks, but they have to keep up with Vegas in this series (or close). It will get tougher the longer it goes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 29, 2018 9:42:35 GMT -5
Goaltending interference was called on a goal in OT in the SJ-LV game ... Marshesault ran into the shaft of the goalies stick, spinning him around, Cherry, and MacLean claim it wasn't the stick contact that was interference but contact with the skate and the situation room confirmed that was so ....I call BS ....the replay on my TV clearly shows it was the San Jose defenseman who contacted Jones' skate AFTER Marshensault banged into the stick. MacLean claiming that it shouldn't be interference if it was the stick, because a poke check is not interference. And MacLean is suppose to be a ref ... FFS. Then he goes on to say it was out of the blue crease ....goaltender interference does not matter if you are in the blue paint or not. The only difference is incidental contact versus intentional, that's what the blue paint is for Cherry's sniffing glue. No contact with Jones' skate. I still don't like the call. Marchessault should be as entitled to the white ice as Jones is to the blue. Was over after that. VGK had no legs in the second OT. Sharks were all over them and drew two PPs, scoring on the second. But under the rules, Marchessault is not entitled to the white ice. You can not make contact with a goalie who is attempting to make a save anywhere. If players started getting priority, then goalie could start getting run over .... |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 29, 2018 9:57:24 GMT -5
As Kelly Hrudey said last night, if a goalie's at the outer edge of his crease facing a shooter, the butt of his goal stick will usually be protruding into the white ice.
Such is the nature of the stance.
I think they got the call correct....except Cherry, who was 100% wrong with the skate clip....but MacLean had to "yield to the expert"....or be further berated.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 29, 2018 10:27:48 GMT -5
Cherry's sniffing glue. No contact with Jones' skate. I still don't like the call. Marchessault should be as entitled to the white ice as Jones is to the blue. Was over after that. VGK had no legs in the second OT. Sharks were all over them and drew two PPs, scoring on the second. But under the rules, Marchessault is not entitled to the white ice. You can not make contact with a goalie who is attempting to make a save anywhere. If players started getting priority, then goalie could start getting run over .... That's what the crease is for. And contact like that outside the crease is a far cry from Lucic running over Miller. I'm not saying goalies are fair game. I'm just saying that if part of your body leaves the crease, is contacted incidentally by an opponent and the puck goes in, it should be treated like you were bumped by a teammate. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Apr 29, 2018 13:47:09 GMT -5
The was another goalie interference call that went the Sharks way. Burns scored a goal on a wraparound with Meier in the crease. I thought there was a hit of a push from the Vegas D man butMeier didn't make much of an effort to get out of the way. Anyone see it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 29, 2018 14:53:55 GMT -5
But under the rules, Marchessault is not entitled to the white ice. You can not make contact with a goalie who is attempting to make a save anywhere. If players started getting priority, then goalie could start getting run over .... That's what the crease is for. And contact like that outside the crease is a far cry from Lucic running over Miller. I'm not saying goalies are fair game. I'm just saying that if part of your body leaves the crease, is contacted incidentally by an opponent and the puck goes in, it should be treated like you were bumped by a teammate. Based on Marshensault's reaction, I don't think he did it accidentally. He kinda shrugged and slightly nodded as if acknowledging he got caught |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 29, 2018 15:18:39 GMT -5
That's what the crease is for. And contact like that outside the crease is a far cry from Lucic running over Miller. I'm not saying goalies are fair game. I'm just saying that if part of your body leaves the crease, is contacted incidentally by an opponent and the puck goes in, it should be treated like you were bumped by a teammate. Based on Marshensault's reaction, I don't think he did it accidentally. He kinda shrugged and slightly nodded as if acknowledging he got caught or he knows how the NHL works and just shrugged and said "whatever". I thought it should have been a good goal (still do). he was going around the net, was hounded, didn't look to intentionally move into the stick. I picked SJ to win the series but think LV got jobbed here. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 29, 2018 15:34:39 GMT -5
It does not matter if the contact was intentional or not ... Do we all agree that there was contact? That's the standard. Contact, any contact, that impedes his ability to make the save ... This contact spun him around, so obviously it affected his ability to make a save
Here is the rule
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.
Contact Outside the Goal Crease - If an attacking player initiates any contact with a goalkeeper, other than incidental contact, while the goalkeeper is outside his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.
A goalkeeper is not "fair game" just because he is outside the goal crease. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an attacking player makes unnecessary contact with the goalkeeper. However, incidental contact will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such unnecessary contact.
When a goalkeeper has played the puck outside of his crease and is then prevented from returning to his crease area due to the deliberate actions of an attacking player, such player may be penalized, if by his actions outside of his crease he deliberately interferes with an attacking player who is attempting to play the puck or an opponent.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 29, 2018 15:42:33 GMT -5
I understand that, Skilly. I just think it is wrong. I know the problem then becomes intent and we are in an untenable position.
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Apr 29, 2018 16:39:42 GMT -5
More goal review fun. The infamous inconclusive evidence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 17:17:54 GMT -5
From one angle NBC showed, that puck did cross the line. Toronto somehow missed it.
No complaints, though. Pittsburgh got away with a fair bit of hacks and trips today.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 29, 2018 17:38:04 GMT -5
More goal review fun. The infamous inconclusive evidence. Those are the calls that usually go against us, nice to see another team get burned The NHL doesn't allow deductive reasoning ... I think it was in. But you can't think it's in, you have to know its in. And you also have to know the position of the puck at the moment the whistle blew. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Apr 29, 2018 18:45:16 GMT -5
And sometimes, they don't even have to SEE a play in order to call a penalty on it....
The Preds up 1-0, and the ref, with his back turned on the play, turned and called an interference penalty when he saw a Winnipeg stick on the ice and heard the Jet yell in complaint.
Jets now up 2-1 because of that nonsense. There's no way he saw that play....he just presumed it HAD to be a penalty.
Would make my blood boil if I was a diehard Preds' fan....
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Apr 29, 2018 20:19:26 GMT -5
It is a shame one of these teams will be going home after this round.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 20:43:56 GMT -5
For a big goaltender, Rinne certainly looks small. I don't know if he plays deep, or goes down too early, or what. Ridiculous pressure by the Jets to tie the game late. They're such a good team.
|
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 29, 2018 20:56:24 GMT -5
Great night offensively for Subban, though a night to forget defensively for him and his partner. However, in fairness, on that tying goal, Bonino really needs to stop that pass from getting through.
|
|
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/6F6VF25GCFF2HFJCOITRJSGNPE.jpg)
