If you accept the premise that everyone is potentially a murderous psychopath, and everyone is in danger of someone else snapping and killing them for no reason during unrelated sporting events, then yes, that seems like a rational argument.
Then he wouldn't be kiilling him, he would be giving him the gift of eternal life. As a vampire.But what if Marchand is a vampire? He may have a point.
Then he wouldn't be kiilling him, he would be giving him the gift of eternal life. As a vampire.
The thing is, the Bruins were just as good on the road this year as at home. I expect closer games, but at this point wouldn't be surprised to win in 4 or 5. Toronto has no answer for either of the top two lines and while they will have the advantage of playing the matchup game at home, there will always be one or two lines that are exposed. The Bruins are just too deep for Toronto.For the benefit of us casual fans - what are some of the regular poster's takeaways from these first two games? How confident are you that the B's can replicate what worked in games 1 and 2 during these next two games up north?
Discussion of regular season here:This might be worth a whole thread -- though I'm not sure what forum -- but I feel like home ice/field/court advantage may be the most extreme in hockey. As with football, there is the adrenaline push that can be channeled positively in terms of crowd noise (big hits, etc). As with baseball, there is a fundamental rule difference that benefits the home team (last change in hockey vs last ups in baseball). Many years ago, hockey rinks could be different sizes (as in baseball) but I feel like that is no longer the case.
In the case of this series, it seems that, as FL4WL3SS mentions, the last change advantage doesn't help Toronto all that much as they don't have the depth to match up everywhere (nor do I think they have anyone who can shut down the B's 1st line the way it is playing right now). So it will be really important for the Bruins to avoid penalties and get out to an early lead to take away the noise/adrenaline factor.
However, some research has shown that during the postseason, playing in front of the home fans may be a bigger disadvantage. Research published in the mid-1980s found that for World Series games played between 1924-1982 the home team won 60 percent of the first two games, yet only 40 percent of the last two games. During a similar time period, NBA teams won 70 percent of the first four games, but during the fifth and six games the percentage dropped to 46 percent.
Most surprisingly, in deciding seventh games, the winning percentage for the home team was only 38 percent. Yet, more recent research found NBA home teams win almost all Game 7s. Therefore, at least in the NBA, "championship choking" has become less prevalent.
I didn't think that the score reflected the actual discrepancy in play - the teams seemed closer on the ice than on the scoreboard. So yeah, Toronto will be jumping, and they aren't that far off being more competitive...but there's still a gap between 'in the game' and 'having the most goals at the end.'
Not expecting more blowouts on the road, but hoping for two more Ws!
Great point and this should be another point of emphasis by Cassidy.In answer to JimD’s question — and I think I already said it in a game thread — the Bruins did a good job neutralizing Toronto’s speed in the first two games by being aggressive in the neutral zone. If a team as fast as Toronto starts getting clean zone entries, things can get out of hand in a hurry.
I've also been thinking about this. He didn't seem to help Rask much on the late 2 on 1 score, never really taking either of the attackers. Perhaps it is more matchup driven? He did play well in games 1 & 2. Is it possible that Toronto was able to manipulate (via last change and the long bench) the matchups better? I did notice a higher number of times that when Toronto had the puck in the offensive zone they were swapping out the points more frequently than I had previously seen in an effort to have fresh bodies pressing the defense (maybe I just missed it previously?). I also think Miller was more tentative taking the body - maybe he was seeing more speed on the ice against him.I checked out of the game thread after the game ended, so this might have been at least partially addressed, but can we talk about Kevan Miller's sucktastic play last night? I don't remember him being this bad in the first two games (and he scored in game two), but the Bruins' dominance of the Leafs in those games might have been overwhelming enough to cover up Miller's failings. He kept getting beat, turned the puck over several times, and was minus-three for the night.
Might as well get it in one place.....I've also been thinking about this. He didn't seem to help Rask much on the late 2 on 1 score, never really taking either of the attackers. Perhaps it is more matchup driven? He did play well in games 1 & 2. Is it possible that Toronto was able to manipulate (via last change and the long bench) the matchups better? I did notice a higher number of times that when Toronto had the puck in the offensive zone they were swapping out the points more frequently than I had previously seen in an effort to have fresh bodies pressing the defense (maybe I just missed it previously?). I also think Miller was more tentative taking the body - maybe he was seeing more speed on the ice against him.
I think with Gryz out the Bs defense was vulnerable - Holden didn't acquit himself well IMO, and the pairing of Holden and McQuaid was getting pressured more than I expected. I think Cassidy did some mixing and matching, but given Toronto's speed, I don't know how else he could have adjusted. I wonder with the defense not looking their best if it will also limit Cassidy's ability to use Donato who hasn't shown an ability yet to handle all of his defensive responsibilities.
I'm looking forward to the responses from others here...
And Logan'sDad followed with:There's a lot of talk of getting pinned in the d-zone. Could that be related to Grzelcyk's absence? I think Cassidy tried to split up Miller and Krug so that one would be with the less mobile McQ or Holden, but then he went back to it, as neither McQ nor Holden looked especially good with Krug. Having Krug, McAvoy and Grz gives them one potential one-man rush on every pair.
I absolutely think Grz being out had a bigger effect than is being talked about. Holden is serviceable, but having both him and McQuaid in the lineup against a team as fast as Toronto is really bad. Miller and Krug are a really good second pair, McQuaid and Holden are a really bad third pair. But splitting Miller and Krug up makes two not awesome pairs below Chara and McAvoy.
It's a tough situation to have to deal with right now, and I think Toronto is the worst possible team in the playoffs to lose Grz against. Hopefully he is back Thursday but he looked very not good at the end of game 2.
Without the benefit of seeing another good replay since, that was the most egregious thing about the goal, and I wonder how the communication between he and Rask was leading up to it. I’ll take another look at it later and see if I find something new with a fresh set of eyes.He didn't seem to help Rask much on the late 2 on 1 score, never really taking either of the attackers.
I'm no expert, but I thought he sealed off the pass quite well, and made the shooter shoot.Without the benefit of seeing another good replay since, that was the most egregious thing about the goal, and I wonder how the communication between he and Rask was leading up to it. I’ll take another look at it later and see if I find something new with a fresh set of eyes.
I feel the same way about Miller. I was his biggest detractor last year but he's been great this year and in the 1st two playoffs games. The 2 biggest areas to clean up heading into game 4 is eliminating the stretch pass breakdowns and doing a better job getting the puck out of our defensive zone (seemed like a lot of those possessions were so long they felt like PP's). And continue to focus on controlling the neutral zone with the Leafs team speed.The last goal, Miller played the pass (and took it away) and let Rask handle the shooter which is Hockey 101. Unfortunately, Rask got beat.
The 2-1 goal was poor awareness between Krug and Miller. Marner beat Miller and received the long stretch pass and was in alone, Marleau beat Krug to the far post for the finish.
The 3-2 goal was a 5 way Bruin clusterfuck. Miller was a half second late to Matthews, but he had just blocked a shot in the low slot and seemed to be in some discomfort. Plus the Bruins had opportunities to clear the zone and couldn’t.
Edit: I didn’t really have any problem with Miller. B’s main defensive issue is cleaning up the stretch pass breakdowns.
Well, happy birthday to me. Let’s make it an elimination game.Game 5 is Saturday night at 8 PM on NBC per the Bruins.
Sportsnet is reporting Bergeron is out for tonight's game - citing the Bruin's website. Anything reported on this locally?
Wow, yeah it really is. The disconnect with reality is staggering in Laffsnation.BTW, Leafs fan Twitter is glorious this morning. Just do a search for Marchand. You won't be disappointed.
Cherry did a quick thing on 2 on 1s after the game, saying that particular situation may have cost the Leaf's the series.Yeah - anyone who has questions about playing defense on a 2 on 1 there should read that. That was excellent.