The Chicoutimi Cucumber

The longer this goes on, the more it favours the Bs because we're down to five defencemen. MUCH better overall effort in the third. Probably because they had to go for it. I'm really annoyed at the Habs for letting the Prunes back in this series. The Bruins are now playing with exactly the attitude that I've seen from them every time they eliminate the Habs in the playoffs: fuelled with some sort of sense of grievance, some vision of themselves as avengers of all the terrible injustices they've somehow suffered at the hands of the Habs. They had the same vibe in 1994. However, we're one shot away from being back in the driver's seat. Kudos to Wamsley for being the voice of reason in this thread As for GWG, I go with: -Marchand -Cammy

Crappy effort. It does look like last year's series vs. Washington, except that these Bruins don't have that kind of firepower so there's really no excuse. Not having a great grasp of tactical intricacies, I'm tempted to say that the Bruins altered their game in some way at about the mid-point of Game Four and that the Habs have yet to adjust in response. All that being said, this is exactly the kind of situation you want to be in. Price has given us a shot. One great period and we're ahead in the series. LET'S GO LES BOYS!!!

I especially like #4

My instincts are that the patterns of this series - Habs have the edge, first goal wins - were broken in Game 4. So it stands to 'reason' that the 'home ice disadvantage' pattern will also break tonight. I expect a Boston win, followed by a desperation win by us in Game 6; and then a toss-up for game 7. You heard it here first.

Well, I've been pretty consistent over the last few months saying this team should do WHATEVER it takes to make the jump to bona-fide contender. Dumping Gomez may be a necessary part of that. However, the series isn't over yet and it's perhaps premature to talk about dumping guys. Game 5 beckons.

It's hard to say, isn't it? The hopeful thing is that every time they need to win - almost every single time - they seem to come up with one of those textbook Devils-style performances. Hell, just look at the first 30 minutes tonight. So to me, the question is: are they just not good enough to play that way consistently (your suggestion)? Or do they have an unintentional tendency to take the easier path when things look good (the 'underdog' explanation)? The third option is that they don't do it consistently because it's too punishing, which gets back to team design (too many small players, etc.). This series won't give us the answer, that's for sure, because it's desperation time from here on in.

I don't think I'm making excuses. This team takes its foot off the accelerator at the first opportunity, perhaps because of cockiness, but more likely because The System is very demanding. It's hard to play that way and consciously or not, you tend to let up when you see daylight, or so I'd speculate. It's worth noting that they won two game sevens last playoff. These guys have no track record of handily beating opponents. Their collective psyche just seems to be that of the scrapper coming off the mat to score a KO. You're absolutely right that if they ever actually want to WIN something, they will have to get over that and learn to kill the opponent when they're down. I see the issue as relentless fidelity to the system. If we can sustain that for 60 minutes every night, we will win.

I don't give a sh*t about those kinds of stats myself, and if you ask me, the situation you describe is exactly the sort in which this Habs team has consistently delivered. They seem to love being behind the 8-ball and that's when they bring their best. Unfortunately, as this series have shown, we are not a team that copes well at all with being the favourite. We're the boxer who does his damage coming out of the corner.

Well, fair enough. I sure prefer that analysis to the idea of Price's game slipping in the clutch. As this series wears on the absence of Gorges and Markov become more glaring. That may seem like an obvious statement, but it's still frustrating. What's puzzling, also, is why these guys seem to loosen their commitment to The System whenever they find themselves in a good spot. It happened in Game 3 and it happened after Kostitsyn's goal tonight. It's as if they can only muster the commitment required to play that way when their backs are to the wall. Understandable I suppose - I'm not the guy being asked blocking 95-mph slapshots - but you'd think they'd have learned by now: play the system, you usually win. Don't, you usually don't. It ain't rocket science.

Dream on, bud, Pouliot is almost certainly destined to be another in that long line of players who doesn't live up to their potential, for whatever reason. He will not do the things you want from him on any kind of consistent basis. Any more than Latendresse is likely to show up for training camps in good shape Leopards, meet spots.

I'm a little worried about Price. It's not that he's played badly, exactly; but he seems to be off the angles, overcompensating and giving up too many juicy rebounds. The thing is, if he's merely decent we're gonna be hard pressed to win this thing. Very disappointing game, obviously. This team lives and dies by its shutdown game and that was sorely lacking tonight.

Not to worry. I'm sure that Mike Milbury, Don Cherry, PJ Stock and the rest of the Code Police will express their righteous outrage at this classless behaviour with all the energy they've devoted to attacking PK Subban's 'attitude' all season long. They're all about the good of the game, right?

Yeah, Price needs to make that save. We're still in the driver's seat, though - let's hope it stays that way.

Well, I think we need to calm down and remember that nobody was expecting a Habs sweep going in. Next game is crucial, but this Habs team has shown shocking resiliency before under arduous circumstances. If they do lose Game Four, though, I'll be mad at them - not for endangering the series (it will simply be an even split, the toss-up it always was) but for squandering the opportunity to close out the series early and thus earning some rest for the next one. These guys need to man up and put the Bruins out of their misery ASAP. That the Habs outshot Boston last night just shows to me the uselessness of shot totals as an indicator of play. The team that's playing catch-up usually gets more shots. This is one reason why the 'experts' are again off-base when they try to 'prove' that the Habs suck, with reference to shots against.

Had to miss this one. It sounds, though, like the Bruins made some adjustments and it took us awhile to figure them out. Or was it just a matter of intensity?

I think that everyone around the league is in awe of Chara's physical strength and there is a widespread sense of gratitude to him for generally not using it to the maximum extent possible (i.e., killing guys every game). It's this accumulated goodwill that probably bought him so much clemency for the obviously savage assault on Patches, and that also feeds into this kind of 'tragic gentle giant' BS. Anyway: Chara SHOULD feel bad for what he did to Pacioretty. If he doesn't feel bad about almost killing a young man, then he is a sociopath. But you know what? Pacioretty feels a lot WORSE. F*ck Chara and the horse he rode in on. Meanwhile, I'm nervous about tonight! It's a series-defining game and I won't be able to watch the first half. But how will the Habs be able to perform without my cheering them on through the TV set?

Sharp analysis by Wamsley. The Rangers series was the real aberration - Messier was hurt and owned by Damphousse for the first two games. Once he came around, we were doomed. That noxious Canes series, 'nuff said. The difference between this series and past ones is that we were GENUINE underdogs in those cases - up against clearly better teams. This series is indeed more akin the series from the 80s, where, whatever the "experts" say, I KNEW the Habs could play with their opponent. That's what I've found so weird about this series. From the get-go I believed that we had a fully legitimate chance to win. Not a feeling I'm accustomed to, after 15 years of abysmal teams. Still, we're a long way from victors yet. As Wamsley says, the trap to avoid now is letting the Prunes back in this thing, and winning Game Three in Montreal really could put some wind in their sails. You've got the snake under your heel. Cut off its stinking viper's head tonight.

It's absolutely right to say that the way to beat the Habs is to trap them. Out-Hab the Habs. Then our lack of size and elite scoring power up front become problems, because we don't have players who can punch through the suffocating defence. It's quite remarkable that not all teams seem to have figured that out. Having said that, it may not be QUITE that simple. The X-factor is the speed of our forwards. This ain't the 1990s where you can clutch and grab like crazy. So while I'm sure Julien is not an idiot and wants his team to play hermetic defence, Boston may simply lack the horses on the blueline to execute. That's what I was getting at in the 'series' thread when I suggested that the match-ups are wrong for Boston in this series. Boston may have the exact inverse of what you need to beat the Canadiens: mostly medium-sized D of mostly moderate mobility, combined with big hulking forwards that our bulky D can mostly handle. What you really want is blazing speed PLUS physicality up front and a suffocating, intimidating blueline. While that combo will beat a lot of teams, it is particularly toxic to ye Habs, which is why Philly owns our asses. Boston may not be optimally built to match our particular combination of strengths and weaknesses. In that sense, strategy may not be their main problem. Still, they win Game 3, suddenly WE'RE the team under pressure, so it ain't over yet.

The wider media will never accept that the Habs are a good team, so why expect Boston 'journalists' to accept it even when the evidence has stared them in the face all season? Perceptive point by Trizzak. If Boston gets the first goal, the dynamics could change considerably. I agree with BTH that the odds now favour us by a significant margin, but this thing could conceivably still turn. As for Chara, that gorilla is an impact player, no question - but all the commentators seem to have forgotten that we beat them in game one WITH Chara in the lineup EDIT: I just wanted to throw some props to Eller, who played what might be one of the best playoff games by a raw rookie that I've seen from a Hab in some time. THAT was impressive.

BTH, that was a brilliant post! What it goes to show, to some degree, is that these 'experts' are really just generalists. They only acquire any specialized insight into a team if they follow it night in and night out (in which case, homer bias tends to seep in, contaminating the analysis from a different direction). That's why you'll tend to get vastly more insightful analysis from bloggers and intelligent posters on this site, as well as the rare analytically-minded pros who actually specialize in the team being discussed (Arpon Basu being the showcase in this context). The hacks like Pat Hickey just regurgitate the conventional wisdom shaped by their generalist colleagues. Anyhow, you've cracked the code. Expect a call from Claude Julien asking you to solve the last great mystery of modern science - cracking the habs's D

100%. Look at the Canucks. Total, absolute composure regardless of what happens. THAT'S the poise you get from winning teams. The Bruins? Whining, frustration, letting it get to you - that's how you lose. Wamsley called it. The Devils model. It is awesome to witness.

The Bruins have made adjustments and are looking pretty good. It's up to the Habs to adjust in turn - or else the third is going to be a shooting gallery, on a night when Price looks good but not superhuman. The good news is we have a 3-1 lead Boy, if we can win this thing, it'll be absolutely huge.

Thinking about this series - admittedly, influenced by Game One, which may not turn out to be representative - I believe the 'experts' are wrong for a specific reason. The Bruins are supposed to be just too big and bad for puny Montreal to handle. However, it's not just size that matters, but matchups. Boston has big, physical forwards, but other than Chara they are NOT particularly huge or intimidating on the blueline. Now look at the Habs. We have small forwards, but our blueline is anything but small. Hammer is big. Gill is a hulk. PK is built like a brick outhouse. Spacek, while not huge, is also robust. Mara is tough. Sopel is a rock. And so forth. What this means is that, without denying the physical impressiveness of the Bruins up front, our D is in fact quite unlikely to be overwhelemed by them on any kind of regular basis. And at the other end, because the B's D is not particularly intimidating (apart from Chara), our forwards aren't likely to be physically dominated down low or around the net on a consistent basis either, especially factoring in our speed. The kind of team that will give Montreal real trouble is a team with a big, suffocating defence corps, a la Philadelphia, and perhaps a team with super fast forwards. THEN our size really hurts us because they can just crush the life out of the Cammys and Giontas, while the speed overwhelms a D whose mobility is adequate but not elite. But the distribution of size among the rosters is wrong for Boston. Their supposed 'size advantage' really doesn't turn out to be all that great. All told, then, this might explain why Boston has had such a hard time with Montreal this season despite their seeming advantages on paper. And if I'm right, Habs fans do indeed have every reason to confident that we can play with these guys and quite possibly beat them.

Hey, I'm not trying to say this is a rational feeling. It's playoff paranoia. Really, it'd only be an issue if the players themselves were in danger of contracting the same attitude, which I doubt is true of this veteran bunch.

This game is huge. Game One is always the least important (although the Habs really got as much out of a Game One win as you possibly can, sending the entire city of Boston scurrying for anti-depressants and clearly exposing the Bruins's limitations). If we win tonight, the series is not "over" but the odds skew just massively in the Habs's favour and the Bruins stand in grave danger of falling apart under the weight of their own neuroses. As others have said, the Bruins understand exactly what is on the line tonight and will bring EVERYTHING they've got. I've been a little nervous, not about the habs, but about what seems to be excessive confidence among Habs fans - it feels like bad karma - but then again this savvy and battle-scarred team doesn't seem to give a sh*t about that stuff. They've got a job to do.