GDT May 8, Boston vs Montreal, 7:30 PM

[hab29RETIRED]

I said the same thing after game 3. Play Beaulieu, on the suggestion of putting Bouillon back in, I said I'd rather have Beaulieu, Tinordi, Murrey, and Bouillon - I that order.

There was a shift yesterday, where Murrey three hits. But he was chasing the bruins to make those hits and we didn't get the puck. We were trying to hard to play the bruins game, than our own game.

Julien took a chance, played a rookie and he potted the winner. We are playing it safe.

I'd rather Tinordi than Murray.

I just want Beaulieu because I see an area where his skating can really burn Boston in the neutral zone.

But yeah, Tinordi would still be an upgrade on Murray.

16.7% is quite simply not close to good enough... I don't care how many hits the guy throws.

[Guest Stogey24]

I HATE DOUGLAS MURRAY

Corsi tonight

PK and Gorges over 61%

Markov and Emelin over 43%

Murray and Weaver under 17%

Thats AWFUL...

Was it a bad bounce? Yes

Here is the thing though, the chances of a bad bounce going against you increase greatly when the other team has the puck 83% of the time you are on the ice.

Actual shots on goal.... even worse... 10 shots on goal against Murray (in 10 minutes of even strength).... 1 shot on goal for.

So you make your own luck, and if we could get any kind of transition with Murray on the ice... we'd be a lot better team, and wouldn't have as many chances for crap goals like that.

Our coaching staff will never do it. Not in a million years, but I’d play Beaulieu game 5. (I said on another site I’d play him game 4).

Give him the heavily sheltered even strength minutes Murray is getting.

Our offence this series is being generated through a slick skating defenceman with a hard slap shot who is giving the Bruins fits as he is just too fast for them.

Beaulieu is nowhere near as polished as PK Subban. I get that, I really do. But the thing is he’d be in those sheltered minutes against the Bruins third and fourth lines, with either the Eller line likely also on the ice… or at worst a line with Moen and Weise helping defensively…. and he’d have a stay at home vet Mike Weaver beside him.

I’d put the kid in and see what he could generate with his speed against a slower Boston team. I really would. I think his ability to skate with the puck and to pass the puck would be welcomed to starting our transition game.

And contrary to what some might believe, Beaulieu can throw hits, and he can fight. His biggest issues are that he needs better defensive positioning right now, but I think that can be hidden via the minutes.

Yes its risky… but the Bruins took a risk and put in an AHL goal scorer in Fraser tonight…. It worked.

Honestly, 5 v 5 Boston is the better team. If the Habs were the better team, I’d never suggest this risk, but we’re really not the better team 5v5 in this series. So you want to win it… Take a chance…. It might just pay off.

Then we would have to hear your "Corsi" stats on Beaulieu

[Lovett's Magnatones]

I HATE DOUGLAS MURRAY

Corsi tonight

PK and Gorges over 61%

Markov and Emelin over 43%

Murray and Weaver under 17%

Thats AWFUL...

Was it a bad bounce? Yes

Here is the thing though, the chances of a bad bounce going against you increase greatly when the other team has the puck 83% of the time you are on the ice.

Actual shots on goal.... even worse... 10 shots on goal against Murray (in 10 minutes of even strength).... 1 shot on goal for.

So you make your own luck, and if we could get any kind of transition with Murray on the ice... we'd be a lot better team, and wouldn't have as many chances for crap goals like that.

Our coaching staff will never do it. Not in a million years, but I’d play Beaulieu game 5. (I said on another site I’d play him game 4).

Give him the heavily sheltered even strength minutes Murray is getting.

Our offence this series is being generated through a slick skating defenceman with a hard slap shot who is giving the Bruins fits as he is just too fast for them.

Beaulieu is nowhere near as polished as PK Subban. I get that, I really do. But the thing is he’d be in those sheltered minutes against the Bruins third and fourth lines, with either the Eller line likely also on the ice… or at worst a line with Moen and Weise helping defensively…. and he’d have a stay at home vet Mike Weaver beside him.

I’d put the kid in and see what he could generate with his speed against a slower Boston team. I really would. I think his ability to skate with the puck and to pass the puck would be welcomed to starting our transition game.

And contrary to what some might believe, Beaulieu can throw hits, and he can fight. His biggest issues are that he needs better defensive positioning right now, but I think that can be hidden via the minutes.

Yes its risky… but the Bruins took a risk and put in an AHL goal scorer in Fraser tonight…. It worked.

Honestly, 5 v 5 Boston is the better team. If the Habs were the better team, I’d never suggest this risk, but we’re really not the better team 5v5 in this series. So you want to win it… Take a chance…. It might just pay off.

Even I agree with you here. Colton Orr's corsi this year was around 39%, to have a CF% of 17 is embarrassing. He can't get the puck out of the zone, and I think, detractors aside, Therrien is too good of a coach to put him in on the road.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I couldn't watch this game due to inescapable professional obligations, unfortunately. But I notice an interesting tension between the posts by the "Murray/Therrien" blamers and those who say the Habs played really well. Given that the final score was 1-0 in OT, am I correct to think the Habs played a pretty damned strong playoff game? If so then I'm not sure that "blame" is especially relevant.

What seems very unsettling here is Rask finding his confidence. That's not good. Like the rest of you, I think we are now in a position where the Bruins have tilted the odds pretty heavily in their favour.

At the end of the day, though, we are up against a superior team, the best in the league, or maybe second best after Chicago. Win or lose, this series is an ideal measuring stick for how close or far away we are from being bona-fide contenders. Rancour at the team for losing really doesn't make sense.

I've said before that I'd dress Beaulieu for just the reason Commandant sites - added speed on the transition game. I believe in playing to your strengths, not the opposition's. Game Three showed us to be capable of being too fast for BO. Adding Beaulieu would further enhance that advantage. Tinordi just seems like a less confident version of Murray at this stage, so I'm not sure I'd throw him in there.

But while I get the "you're only as strong as your weakest link" argument, fundamentally, I don't believe that we're going to win or lose the series based on whether Bouillon, Murray, or Beaulieu slot in. It's a bit like arguing over who should be on the fourth line. When the history of this series is written, if guys like MaxPac and Vanek aren't notable on the scoresheets, we won't win. And where, oh where, is Playoff Hero Briere? These are the sort of players who need to be coming through.

But really, it's too soon to blame anyone. It's all hands on deck for Game Five, which will be absolutely huge, and a great opportunity for Price et al. to dash the Brutes' hearts against the rocks. You don't win the Cup without pulling victory from the fire; this is the greatest test yet for this spirited team of ours.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

I think a good stat, I can't quote it, is that in games where Murray plays more than x minutes, the Habs lose more games. Whether this is because of extended PK time leading to more minutes might be the case.

I don't really put much stock in corsi/fenwick, but when you're a frickin 17%, your team isn't going to score. And last night, with Murray out there for 15 minutes, that's 11-13 even strength minutes where the Habs couldn't score.

I can give credit where credit is due, without a high hockey IQ and bruising play, Douglas Murray isn't an NHL player. He'll get a contract next year, I wouldn't mind seeing him down here with the kids on the Panthers.

[DON]

Fun game and really cant fault anyone.

Darn even game all over stat sheet, cept 3 -0 shots in OT for Bruins and would be nice to see Pacioretty & Vanek firing puck more..

Thought Bournival stood out as fast skating and at least was getting puck on net.

And the leaders Markov, Gionta and Gorges all played very well.

And Murray provided couple highlight shifts, loved it.

Should be nother good one on Saturday and Molson now guaranteed 1 more gate at least.

[dlbalr]

I was content with a split in the first two games and went into this set with the thought that I'd also be content for a split here. Why? The Habs have been a good road team all year and I have a good feeling that they can win a second game in Boston. That didn't change after this set of games. If they can get one of the last two in Boston and win Game 6 at home, they can take care of business. Although last night was disappointing, nothing that has happened so far suggests that Montreal can't pull this off.

[BlueKross]

I couldn't watch this game due to inescapable professional obligations, unfortunately. But I notice an interesting tension between the posts by the "Murray/Therrien" blamers and those who say the Habs played really well. Given that the final score was 1-0 in OT, am I correct to think the Habs played a pretty damned strong playoff game? If so then I'm not sure that "blame" is especially relevant.

What seems very unsettling here is Rask finding his confidence. That's not good. Like the rest of you, I think we are now in a position where the Bruins have tilted the odds pretty heavily in their favour.

At the end of the day, though, we are up against a superior team, the best in the league, or maybe second best after Chicago. Win or lose, this series is an ideal measuring stick for how close or far away we are from being bona-fide contenders. Rancour at the team for losing really doesn't make sense.

I've said before that I'd dress Beaulieu for just the reason Commandant sites - added speed on the transition game. I believe in playing to your strengths, not the opposition's. Game Three showed us to be capable of being too fast for BO. Adding Beaulieu would further enhance that advantage. Tinordi just seems like a less confident version of Murray at this stage, so I'm not sure I'd throw him in there.

But while I get the "you're only as strong as your weakest link" argument, fundamentally, I don't believe that we're going to win or lose the series based on whether Bouillon, Murray, or Beaulieu slot in. It's a bit like arguing over who should be on the fourth line. When the history of this series is written, if guys like MaxPac and Vanek aren't notable on the scoresheets, we won't win. And where, oh where, is Playoff Hero Briere? These are the sort of players who need to be coming through.

But really, it's too soon to blame anyone. It's all hands on deck for Game Five, which will be absolutely huge, and a great opportunity for Price et al. to dash the Brutes' hearts against the rocks. You don't win the Cup without pulling victory from the fire; this is the greatest test yet for this spirited team of ours.

I also missed the game, and i really like where you are going with this post. I would add that it seems to me one has to score to win, at least once. i would like to know if CORSI tells you how much room Murray puts back on the ice by his mere presence. Seems to me the boys played a pretty good game against a tough rival. We are in alot better spot than I though we would be.

[habs rule]

Boy that was a tough game to lose. The guys played well, but a crazy bounce and boom it's over. I don't think MT will play Murray in Boston, so I would bet that Frankie cube will be back in. I read an article by Eklund today that made a lot of sense. I know that statement is a real oxymoron.His take is that the Habs are paying Briere 4 million per year to play in the playoffs. It is his fame. He scores key goals in the playoffs. Then the question has to be asked, why isn't MT playing him? He played 8 mins last night. I hate to agree with EK0 but even a blind squirrel gets one right once in a while. This group of guys are not the give up type, they will fight to the bitter end. Patches needs to put 1 in then the floodgates will open. I would be putting the vanek dd patches line back together. They are under the gun now. That NO EXCUSES thing is going to be needed now. I think the game day thread needs Yvonne and the Pug.

If they lose the next one , it's over. So lets go to BAWSTON and kick some yankee a$$.

[Commandant]

I think a good stat, I can't quote it, is that in games where Murray plays more than x minutes, the Habs lose more games. Whether this is because of extended PK time leading to more minutes might be the case.

I don't really put much stock in corsi/fenwick, but when you're a frickin 17%, your team isn't going to score. And last night, with Murray out there for 15 minutes, that's 11-13 even strength minutes where the Habs couldn't score.

I can give credit where credit is due, without a high hockey IQ and bruising play, Douglas Murray isn't an NHL player. He'll get a contract next year, I wouldn't mind seeing him down here with the kids on the Panthers.

I've said many times that Corsi isn't the be all and end all... that you have to actually watch the games too... that there is more to it than just stats. When one guy is 55% and the other is 53%.... thats not enough for me.... I can't judge it. Maybe one is taking more quality shots, maybe one does things like skate well, and the other gets his offence out of forechecking and cycling.... You have to see what fits your team too.... there is an element of eyeball test.

But you are right.... 17% is Terrible, and when you reach those levels of EPIC AWFULNESS, there is no excuse. No amount of hits, no amount of eyeball test, no amount of anything makes up for 17%.

How about this for a stat. Douglas Murray played 12 minutes of even strength last night. In those 12 Minutes.... Shots on goal: Boston 10, Montreal 1.

Prorated over 60 minutes.... thats getting outshot 50-5.

How can you think that is a useful or productive use of 12 minutes of play. How is spending the entire time defending our end helpful to winning the game?

[DON]

Boy that was a tough game to lose. The guys played well, but a crazy bounce and boom it's over. I don't think MT will play Murray in Boston, so I would bet that Frankie cube will be back in. I read an article by Eklund today that made a lot of sense. I know that statement is a real oxymoron.His take is that the Habs are paying Briere 4 million per year to play in the playoffs. It is his fame. He scores key goals in the playoffs. Then the question has to be asked, why isn't MT playing him? He played 8 mins last night. I hate to agree with EK0 but even a blind squirrel gets one right once in a while. This group of guys are not the give up type, they will fight to the bitter end. Patches needs to put 1 in then the floodgates will open. I would be putting the vanek dd patches line back together. They are under the gun now. That NO EXCUSES thing is going to be needed now. I think the game day thread needs Yvonne and the Pug.

If they lose the next one , it's over. So lets go to BAWSTON and kick some yankee a$$.

Wrong again, if they lose the next one the series will be 3-2. If Habs win the next one, it will also simply be 3-2 and series still not over.

[Commandant]

I also missed the game, and i really like where you are going with this post. I would add that it seems to me one has to score to win, at least once. i would like to know if CORSI tells you how much room Murray puts back on the ice by his mere presence. Seems to me the boys played a pretty good game against a tough rival. We are in alot better spot than I though we would be.

It can't be that much room since his linemates only mustered 1 shot on goal while he was on the ice.(of four attempted shots on goal)

That one shot on goal was also originally creditted to the Markov/Emelin pairing while extra skater was doing their "live game tracking" and changed to Murray's pair after the game.... indicating it was unclear who was on the ice without a review of the tape. This indicates that the only shot on goal with Murray on the ice happened during a change on the fly, and Murray may have had absolutely nothing to do with it.

[DON]

I've said many times that Corsi isn't the be all and end all... that you have to actually watch the games too... that there is more to it than just stats. When one guy is 55% and the other is 53%.... thats not enough for me.... I can't judge it. Maybe one is taking more quality shots, maybe one does things like skate well, and the other gets his offence out of forechecking and cycling.... You have to see what fits your team too.... there is an element of eyeball test.

But you are right.... 17% is Terrible, and when you reach those levels of EPIC AWFULNESS, there is no excuse. No amount of hits, no amount of eyeball test, no amount of anything makes up for 17%.

How about this for a stat. Douglas Murray played 12 minutes of even strength last night. In those 12 Minutes.... Shots on goal: Boston 10, Montreal 1.

Prorated over 60 minutes.... thats getting outshot 50-5.

How can you think that is a useful or productive use of 12 minutes of play. How is spending the entire time defending our end helpful to winning the game?

Hope Murray is signed for anther year, soon.

Murray and Vanek had same shot total.

Alot a whining about a 3rd pairing, but if have nothing else to complain about, fly at it. I know some websites primarily spend almost every discussion on Murray (now that have given up on fire idiotsTherrien/Bergevin theme), which is funny a low paid depth d-man gets more discussion than any other Hab, ever.

Go Crankshaft Go!

[Commandant]

No Don... its not a fair comparison of Murray and Vanek.

The stat I gave didn't say Murray had 1 shot on goal. It says that the entire Habs team had 1 shot on goal while Murray was on the ice. Why cause they were pinned in their own end.

Thats not true about Vanek, as he was involved in numerous plays to get Bournival and Plekanec shots on goal.

Basically playing Murray for 12 minutes of even strength, is the equivalent of giving Boston 6 extra powerplays in a game (shot wise).

As for signing him for another year... I see no chance he even gets an offer.

Lets remember that when we hired Bergevin, we brought in a man who learned the Chicago way of doing things.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/hockey/blackhawks/27179980-419/advanced-analytics-are-the-blackhawks-secret-formula-for-success.html#.U2xyWVfPt_S

[BlueKross]

It can't be that much room since his linemates only mustered 1 shot on goal while he was on the ice.(of four attempted shots on goal)

That one shot on goal was also originally creditted to the Markov/Emelin pairing while extra skater was doing their "live game tracking" and changed to Murray's pair after the game.... indicating it was unclear who was on the ice without a review of the tape. This indicates that the only shot on goal with Murray on the ice happened during a change on the fly, and Murray may have had absolutely nothing to do with it.

I recall a series against Ottawa last year, where we got our asses handed to us because we were not tough enough. i don't want Montreal to ever be put in a spot like that again. Even though, your corsi stat suggests that he should be moved out, like he was at the start of the first series, i would be reluctant to change the balance against Boston while we are playing so good. Luckily, coach will make the line up. Lets see what he does.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

Meh, too much talk about Murray. I missed the overtime goal as well since it happened so quickly, but the only thing that concerns me about him was that he was on the ice for the game winning goal. All of those other stats mean very little to me and I won't go into why because it would just sound like regurgitation. With that being said, whenever Murray is on the ice, there are also four other people on the ice who could create things on their own. Lastly, the 10 shots to 1 thing is like comparing Georges to Subban in terms of shot attempts in a full season. One is an offensive defenseman and the other is not. Before you explain how this is a different comparison, I don't think it is because obviously when Murray is on the ice, he's playing in a defensive role and not an offensive one. As long as those 10 shots are kept to the outside then I don't see the harm.

Honestly, it was a 1-0 game and while I get the point to a certain extent (we supposedly couldn't score while Murray is on the ice), it's a bit absurd to pick on our defense (as a whole or individually) as being the reason we lost. It was a coin flip game and the Habs shouldn't be too disappointed in how they played. If anything, I would have liked to see a little more killer instinct by the forwards as that really was an important game.

[Commandant]

Except that over the course of the season 60% of the time Murray is put on the ice it is for an offensive zone faceoff. He's also given matchups against the weakest players on the opposing team.

He's not used as a defensive specialist. He's used in sheltered minutes, in an attempt to not get burned (yet he still does get burned).

As for the numbers.... having him on the ice for 12 minutes is the equivalent of giving 6 extra PPs to the other team. The Habs chances of scoring dramatically decrease with him on the ice... while the Bruins go up.

And here is why the shot count of 10-1 matters.... when the puck is always around your own net, the chance of a bad bounce deciding a game against you are greater.

And yes there were some good scoring chances against Murray, has been all season.

Stats can lie when we are talking 55% vs 50%.

Stats don't lie when we are looking at 16.7% and 10-1

[brobin]

You can debate Murray vs Boo boo, vs rookie all night.

The real issue is our top line needs to deliver and not just on the PP. There will be few Penalties called. We need our top line to start scoring five on five or this is over.

Murray is irrelevant if our top line was scoring.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

Look, I guess my main point is along the lines of what has been said already; we're discussing a 3rd pairing (6th overall) defenseman. If Murray were to come out of the lineup, I wouldn't complain, but I don't think you're fully thinking things through. In game 2, Bouillon had a couple of shots go in off him into the net as our 6th defenseman. Then a couple of games later, Murray had a terrible Corsi, as I'm sure he always does. Between these two, I don't think there's necessarily a difference maker. So obviously, since there have been negative instances or statistics when it comes to both these players, it's natural to want to look somewhere else and for someone who hasn't had the chance to make a "mistake" yet to replace them.

Beaulieu is the guy in this case but from what I have seen this season from him, he honestly wouldn't help that much if at all. I just don't see it. The playoffs are a different animal where defense comes first, especially when you're a defenseman. I guess I just don't think playing Beaulieu is the right call because he hasn't been tested in the playoffs yet and I could just see that even if we did play him, he would get those sheltered minutes you are talking about and wouldn't even be given the opportunity to shine anyway. Right now the only one who matters is the coach because he has to have people in the lineup that he can trust... I think it's obvious that he trusts Bouillon more than Beaulieu and I can't say I'd be any different.

Finally, when it comes to Murray, you're taking a look at shots for and shots against and then following it up by "I don't care how many hits he throws". Well okay then, I guess we should just simply overlook any single positive of having him in the lineup. If we want someone who can't clear the crease or throw the body and who's somewhat good at breaking out of our zone (when not trying to have our players commit suicide) we may as well have kept Diaz. I'm sure he'd be our solution.

[BCHabnut]

Hope Murray is signed for anther year, soon.

Murray and Vanek had same shot total.

Alot a whining about a 3rd pairing, but if have nothing else to complain about, fly at it. I know some websites primarily spend almost every discussion on Murray (now that have given up on fire idiotsTherrien/Bergevin theme), which is funny a low paid depth d-man gets more discussion than any other Hab, ever.

Go Crankshaft Go!

The problem is that it was glaringly obvious every time Murray was on the ice. Stats aside. All one has to do is watch that game to see how badly the boys get hemmed in every time he is out there. The only times he was not a standout negatively was when Eller came and bailed him out. Eller is playing so well in these playoffs. It's awesome to watch him. When Boston had possession in our zone, I found myself looking to see if 81 was on the ice.

[habs rule]

Wrong again, if they lose the next one the series will be 3-2. If Habs win the next one, it will also simply be 3-2 and series still not over.

wrong you missed my point they lose the next one they ain't coming back against these friggin bears.

[nihilz]

Murray drives me mad. This corsi info is also disturbing. Hitz schmitz.. how much does an injured Thornton alter the Bruins?

I thought coming back to Montreal would have been a perfect time to introduce Tinordi into the line-up.

Iggy. Ima call him Iginla. Me & him aint cool no more. So, Iginla.. I used to respect his game and admire his competitiveness. Who didn't?

He knows the history of Pax's injury suffered at the hands of his current club. Yet, yesterday, he deliberately fell on Pacioretty's head while he was on the ice and vulnerable. Not much later is when he rammed his head into the glass. I understand he is a competitor but I fear being a Bruin has rubbed off on him. Ask Dr. Recchi. Anyhow. Shame to see such a classy and respectable guy be so recklessly ignorant or blatantly Bruin. Just my 2 cents.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

I cried about the O'Byrne trade for years, but we have issues getting the puck out of our end against Boston to begin with. Murray can't do the job any more. He's basically like a Parros out there, and with our pp, we don't need a deterrent.

[DON]

wrong you missed my point they lose the next one they ain't coming back against these friggin bears.

No I got your point, but got to disagree and if lose in Boston, the fat lady wont be singing quite yet, odds of winning 6 and 7 is low, but no a done deal.

[illWill]

Alot of good posts about Murray on here. I thought that he played about as good of a game as Douglas Murray can play. That being said, I don't think that his game fit into the style of play that we have been playing thus far. He stood out like a sore thumb. I had no beefs with Frankie in the line up and wouldn't be surprised to see him back in there. I also thought that Beaulieu played really well down the stretch in the few opportunities he had and could generate a bit more offense from the back end. His skating is good enough that he could get back on a play if need be and who knows, he could be the difference like Fraser coming into the lineup.

This game was one of the tightest and closest games I've seen in a long time. Both teams played well enough to win, although I thought Boston had a few better chances to score. Habs just couldn't get any traction and it seemed like the puck was a step ahead of them offensively. I don't think there is any fundamental issues, it was just one of those games.