Jump to content
The Chicoutimi Cucumber

April 26 ~ Game 6: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT EDITION

Recommended Posts

I wonder is Markov is banged up... He isn't as fast as he use to be, but he was brutal the last few games..

81 games playing 25 plus hard minutes a night. Powerplays, killing penalties, overtime, last minute of every game against the opponents best players...................then after that...crank it up for play off hockey every other night. On two bad knees, a bad heel, plus his age. He is an old horse with a lot of miles..............his best hockey for the season was months ago. He can be expected to do not much more than hang on. Gonna surpass the 90 game mark soon. They say mistakes happen when you are tired. Play offs will show just how much you have left in the tank. Nobody is 100 percent by the second round.

Banged up. Markov? Definitely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Positive: I expected to win in six games. We went 3-0 then 1-2 which is fine.

Negative: We nearly choked a three game lead against a goalie who had barely played since February.

Positive: Tampa has been greatly exposed by Detroit and we owned the Wings.

Negative: Mrazek is the reverse Hammond in that he's been brilliant in the post-season stealing three games from the Bolts. Price would have to be that against Tampa as well.

Positive: We are in the second round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel bad for Hammond. He was not bad against Montréal in the playoffs. Sure, he lost two games 4-3 and 3-2, but it's not like his team was bailing him out. He faced 81 shots in two games, allowing 7 goals on them. Yes, Anderson was better - he should be. But I suspect he did a lot damn better than Dustin Tokarski would have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't Chris Lee the ref that has forked the habs time and time again? Maybe I have him mixed up with someone else. But if he is who I think he is, isn't karma wonderful? He really looked like he was going to cry when he realized he had screwed up, which is funny cause he didn't, he made the right call. He lost sight of the puck and blew the whistle. Was it quick? Yes, and of course that has never happened before. (sarcasm) :habslogo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't Chris Lee the ref that has forked the habs time and time again? Maybe I have him mixed up with someone else. But if he is who I think he is, isn't karma wonderful? He really looked like he was going to cry when he realized he had screwed up, which is funny cause he didn't, he made the right call. He lost sight of the puck and blew the whistle. Was it quick? Yes, and of course that has never happened before. (sarcasm) :habslogo:

No, you don't have him mixed up with someone else. Unless this someone else is Tim Peel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it must be Chris Lee. Tim Peel is just a bad ref no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel bad for Hammond. He was not bad against Montréal in the playoffs. Sure, he lost two games 4-3 and 3-2, but it's not like his team was bailing him out. He faced 81 shots in two games, allowing 7 goals on them. Yes, Anderson was better - he should be. But I suspect he did a lot damn better than Dustin Tokarski would have done.

Well niether toker or hammond have played many play off games.....in the small sample size toker played alot better against the rangers than Hammond did against the habs. But the hamburgler had quite a run leading up to play offs.

Isn't Chris Lee the ref that has forked the habs time and time again? Maybe I have him mixed up with someone else. But if he is who I think he is, isn't karma wonderful? He really looked like he was going to cry when he realized he had screwed up, which is funny cause he didn't, he made the right call. He lost sight of the puck and blew the whistle. Was it quick? Yes, and of course that has never happened before. (sarcasm) :habslogo:

Dead wrong call. You know it.

I remember in 011 Gionta scored an identical goal on Thomas. Waved off. We habs fans lost it on the officials. ha! He was almost crying because it was a goal. Looks good on him. :rofl: He has screwed the habs more than once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well niether toker or hammond have played many play off games.....in the small sample size toker played alot better against the rangers than Hammond did against the habs. But the hamburgler had quite a run leading up to play offs.

Dead wrong call. You know it.

I remember in 011 Gionta scored an identical goal on Thomas. Waved off. We habs fans lost it on the officials. ha! He was almost crying because it was a goal. Looks good on him. :rofl: He has screwed the habs more than once.

Nope if he loses sight of the puck he blows the whistle. You and I disagree. Of course when it happens to the Habs I want to kill an official. Just the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope if he loses sight of the puck he blows the whistle. You and I disagree. Of course when it happens to the Habs I want to kill an official. Just the way it is.

It was exactly the right call, because of just what Habs Rule says, he lost sight of the puck. End of story. Was it a bad luck call for the Sens? Yes, but who here cares?

Price's body language looked as though he was squeezing it under his arm, so the whistle blew, that's all folks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember gomez a scoring a goal and Lee waving it off because he intended to blow the whistle. Clean goal no whistle but waved it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sens were hacking at price after every save... Hence the quick whistles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope if he loses sight of the puck he blows the whistle. You and I disagree. Of course when it happens to the Habs I want to kill an official. Just the way it is.

Yes we disagree. But I'll take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember gomez a scoring a goal and Lee waving it off because he intended to blow the whistle. Clean goal no whistle but waved it off.

yea we were burned. Gionta had same thing happen in 011 play offs against thomas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i do believe the PP only matters when your penalty killing is failing you....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Stogey24

i do believe the PP only matters when your penalty killing is failing you....

Or not scoring 5 on 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Islanders lose seven game series by one goal......... 0 for 13 on the pp.

You could say a bad powerplay cost them the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all matters, but on what matters most:

- 5 on 5 defending

- 5 on 5 scoring

- penalty kill

- powerplay

Habs fans still think PP is most important due to 07-08 but I've shown before that the best PP rarely gets you to the finals whereas a strong 5 on 5 and penalty kill is almost always a part of a final four playoff team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

07-08?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

07-08?

We had the best PP in the league and won the East so Habs fans were convinced a strong PP is what gets you to the dance. Of course, our strong PP fizzled in the playoffs and we were a pretender and not a contender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, the lack of a PP is a huge liability. If we could complement our strong 5-on-5 play with a power-play of even middling effectiveness, we'd surely take 'the next step' toward being clear-cut and universally feared contenders. Offence would no longer be a glaring problem.

For years with the Habs, it seems to have been either/or. Either we're strong 5-on-5 (MT), OR we're all about special teams (JM). There really is no rational reason why a team that can be effective at even strength cannot score goals on the PP.

I get that we can win lots of games, and even playoff series, without a good power-play, but I wouldn't minimize the importance of this problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why someone would say the PP is not important to winning the cup is beyond me. Maybe someone can tell why you wouldn't want to score on the PP? This offensively challenged team needs every break it can get, having a good PP puts a lot of pressure on the other team. It can change the momentum in a game in a heart beat. If you score it is a huge lift to the team, if you don't it invigorates the other team. If this team could score on the PP at say 10% the series would have been over in game 4 and the boys would be getting the rest and recovery they need. You can look at other series and other teams but I only care about this one and this one needs frigging goals, one of the ways to get them is when you have one more man on the ice than they do. This is not an argument about what is more important, all aspects are important and because you suck at one does not make it irrelavant. It means you have to fix that problem. Just like you have a poor goalie, you go out and get a good one. There are teams in this playoffs who have been shown to lack goaltending, yet they are good teams high in the standings. (hello St.Louis) You could say goaltending is not important because Detroit won cups with mediocre goaltending.

The PP is as important as any other factor and the sad part is it is usually easy to fix. If you know what a PP is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...