Bruins Round 2 Thread- New York Islanders

Myt1

serves you chicken wings
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
32,237
South Boston
Starting Rask tonight was one of the worst professional decisions you could possibly make. I’m not just talking hockey, or even professional sports. It was everything bad about professional decision-making. It was timid, likely crowd-sourced, ignored context, and appears to have been driven by an inability to differentiate between an acceptable “devil you know” risk and drawing dead.

Starting him last game may have been almost as bad.

I like Cassidy as a coach. A lot. I think that he probably deserves a metric fuckton of credit for helping manage Marchand into the best player and beating heart of this team. But there needs to be a serious examination of just what the fuck was going on here.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
12,338
Starting Rask tonight was one of the worst professional decisions you could possibly make. I’m not just talking hockey, or even professional sports. It was everything bad about professional decision-making. It was timid, likely crowd-sourced, ignored context, and appears to have been driven by an inability to differentiate between an acceptable “devil you know” risk and drawing dead.

Starting him last game may have been almost as bad.

I like Cassidy as a coach. A lot. I think that he probably deserves a metric fuckton of credit for helping manage Marchand into the best player and beating heart of this team. But there needs to be a serious examination of just what the fuck was going on here.
Seems like the idea of naming Swayman as the backup was to address this exact scenario where the primary starter was limited due to injury. If the team felt that Swayman wasn't ready to be the starter in an elimination game, they should have went with Halak.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
41,679
Starting Rask tonight was one of the worst professional decisions you could possibly make. I’m not just talking hockey, or even professional sports. It was everything bad about professional decision-making. It was timid, likely crowd-sourced, ignored context, and appears to have been driven by an inability to differentiate between an acceptable “devil you know” risk and drawing dead.

Starting him last game may have been almost as bad.

I like Cassidy as a coach. A lot. I think that he probably deserves a metric fuckton of credit for helping manage Marchand into the best player and beating heart of this team. But there needs to be a serious examination of just what the fuck was going on here.
Dancing with the one who brought you rings a little hollow when he only started a hair over 40% of the games this season.
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
3,206
Amstredam
The Isles won games where they were not the better team and then won when they were....based on quality of play the Bruins should have won this in 5 probably...but puck luck said otherwise....that's has been and always will be the NHL playoffs, the better team doesn't always win.
 

RoDaddy

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2002
2,642
Albany area, NY
I love the B's and have been watching them forever, but the bottom line is one Cup in the last 49 years despite many opportunities and great players. Just so many years of disappointment including this one
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,006
Gallows Hill
Starting Rask tonight was one of the worst professional decisions you could possibly make. I’m not just talking hockey, or even professional sports. It was everything bad about professional decision-making. It was timid, likely crowd-sourced, ignored context, and appears to have been driven by an inability to differentiate between an acceptable “devil you know” risk and drawing dead.

Starting him last game may have been almost as bad.

I like Cassidy as a coach. A lot. I think that he probably deserves a metric fuckton of credit for helping manage Marchand into the best player and beating heart of this team. But there needs to be a serious examination of just what the fuck was going on here.
It was the classic coach move “If I start the veteran, and he sucks, everyone will blame him, if I start the other guy, and he sucks, they’ll blame me.” Luckily for Bruins fans the Canucks coach made the same mistake.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
28,548
306, row 14
Bruins goals this series:

Pastrnak PPG
Pastrnak
McAvoy
Pastrnak
Hall ENG
Coyle
Bergeron
Marchand PPG
Smith
Marchand
Krejci PPG
Pastrnak
Marchand
Pastrnak
Krejci
Marchand PPG
Marchand PPG

12 of 17 goals came from the top line/top PP. Once again, the depth dried up. Absolutely nothing from the bottom 9. We can bitch and moan about the goalie situation all we want, but the problem, as in pretty much every recent season, was the Bruins inability to score. Trotz moved Pageau to the Bergeron line, slowed them down, Butch didn't counter and that was that. In terms of Cassidy, I'm more pissed he sat on his hands with lines and matchups than I am over Rask.
 

chief1

lurker
Aug 10, 2012
112
And the D were very injured. But the bottom 6 were awful. Beyond not producing, they were outskated, outhit and overall useless.
I an surprised Sweeney is being totally left off the hook here. The 2015 nhl draft alone should be enough to get him fired. He had 3 shots (picks 13, 14 and 15)at setting up the teams future. If he had even hit on one of them, at the very least the Bruins would be a deeper team right now. Instead he went totally off the expected big board to draft Zboril, DeBrusk and Senshaw passing on Conner and Barzal (think that hurt this series?), both of who were considered better prospects by most. To make matters worse the Islanders then grabbed Beauvillier at pick 28. just flipping the first round with the Islanders in the 2015 draft and its the Bruins advancing IMO. Not to mention a much brighter future.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
12,338
I an surprised Sweeney is being totally left off the hook here. The 2015 nhl draft alone should be enough to get him fired. He had 3 shots (picks 13, 14 and 15)at setting up the teams future. If he had even hit on one of them, at the very least the Bruins would be a deeper team right now. Instead he went totally off the expected big board to draft Zboril, DeBrusk and Senshaw passing on Conner and Barzal (think that hurt this series?), both of who were considered better prospects by most. To make matters worse the Islanders then grabbed Beauvillier at pick 28. just flipping the first round with the Islanders in the 2015 draft and its the Bruins advancing IMO. Not to mention a much brighter future.
I am not leaving him off the hook; that draft was a huge missed opportunity. DeBrusk is probably the median outcome for his draft position, but the other two were known to have been badly overdrafted at the outset, so it's not really a surprise that they ended being total busts. They should have had one of Conner or Barzal out of that draft; it's inexcusable, really.

Since then, Sweeney has had some hits and misses; he's probably in the median of GM's at this point, slightly better than replacement level. The Hall trade was a huge hit, even if it didn't totally pay off during the Islanders series. But it will be a wasted opportunity if they are unable to resign him. Trading Lucic when he did was a smart move, as was letting Eriksson and Sodeberg walk. OTOH, the Backes and Beleskey signings were fiascos.
 

Myt1

serves you chicken wings
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
32,237
South Boston
Bruins goals this series:

Pastrnak PPG
Pastrnak
McAvoy
Pastrnak
Hall ENG
Coyle
Bergeron
Marchand PPG
Smith
Marchand
Krejci PPG
Pastrnak
Marchand
Pastrnak
Krejci
Marchand PPG
Marchand PPG

12 of 17 goals came from the top line/top PP. Once again, the depth dried up. Absolutely nothing from the bottom 9. We can bitch and moan about the goalie situation all we want, but the problem, as in pretty much every recent season, was the Bruins inability to score. Trotz moved Pageau to the Bergeron line, slowed them down, Butch didn't counter and that was that. In terms of Cassidy, I'm more pissed he sat on his hands with lines and matchups than I am over Rask.
In at least half the Islanders’ wins, they would have been better off starting a shooter tutor in net.

The Bruins scored 3, 1, 4, and 2 goals in their losses.

The Islanders score 4, 4 (2ENG), 5, and 6 (2ENG).

Playing with the lines would have been deck chairs on the Titanic. Starting Rask in Games 3 and 4 was the iceberg.

It was the worst decision a Boston professional sports coach has made in at least a decade. Worse than not playing Malcom Butler.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
In at least half the Islanders’ wins, they would have been better off starting a shooter tutor in net.

The Bruins scored 3, 1, 4, and 2 goals in their losses.

The Islanders score 4, 4 (2ENG), 5, and 6 (2ENG).

Starting Rask in Games 3 and 4 was the worst decision a Boston professional sports coach has made in at least a decade.
I think you mean games 5 and 6, but yeah. It was a “Grady Little leaving Pedro in too long” level gaffe.
 

Myt1

serves you chicken wings
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
32,237
South Boston
I think you mean games 5 and 6, but yeah. It was a “Grady Little leaving Pedro in too long” level gaffe.
Yeah, I meant “wins 3 and 4,” but that’s a stupid, pre-coffee way of thinking about things. Thanks for the correction.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
28,548
306, row 14
In at least half the Islanders’ wins, they would have been better off starting a shooter tutor in net.

The Bruins scored 3, 1, 4, and 2 goals in their losses.

The Islanders score 4, 4 (2ENG), 5, and 6 (2ENG).

Playing with the lines would have been deck chairs on the Titanic. Starting Rask in Games 3 and 4 was the iceberg.

It was the worst decision a Boston professional sports coach has made in at least a decade. Worse than not playing Malcom Butler.
He had a .926 in the series through 4 games. For the postseason, he was at .935 in 9 games. In games 3 and 4 in New York he stopped 58 of 61 shots, .950. Even with the injury, his performance to that point suggested he could play through it and succeed. To be honest, his performance is the reason they even came out of New York at 2-2. They scored 3 goals in 6+ periods. Even with prime Brodeur you're not going to win with that little goal support.

You've made your stance on this abundantly clear. We're just going to disagree. There was no reason to pull the plug prior to game 5. I can buy an argument for game 6 but I would've gone down with Rask too.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
12,740
Up two games to one, and Krejci scores to give Boston a 1-0 lead in the second period of game four.

At that point we ALL thought Boston was the better team and in great shape to put a stranglehold on the series.

From that point on, NY outscored Boston 15-6.

Goodness.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,028
Ya, I hate to pour gas on the fire but this series loss wasn't at all about goaltending. I would have gone with Rask if he was healthy yesterday too. With any semblance of even officiating early in the series and some puck luck and the bruins win this going away. I think focusing on Rask is kinda lazy, tbh. It gives you an easy thing to point the finger at and an easy way to solve the problem going forward. "get a better goalie and we win the cup, kehd." There just isnt much evidence that is true.

The problem was similar to what it has been the last few years. The Bruins have a great first line. You can't stop them, you just try to slow them down. The Islanders couldn't stop them despite having one of the best D pairs in the game stapled to them all series. The problem in this series, and in series past, is that if you slow that line down, the bruins struggle to counter. The Krejci line put up a fair amount of chances early in the series but the production lagged behind and the bottom 6 was just overall terrible. Every team in the playoffs has good top 6 players. They have good top 4 D. You win in the playoffs when you can exploit matchups lower in the lineup and the Bruins consistently cannot do that and when the bounces went the other way early in the series, there wasn't enough coming from those 6 guys to make up the gap.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
423
South Dartmouth, MA
He had a .926 in the series through 4 games. For the postseason, he was at .935 in 9 games. In games 3 and 4 in New York he stopped 58 of 61 shots, .950. Even with the injury, his performance to that point suggested he could play through it and succeed. To be honest, his performance is the reason they even came out of New York at 2-2. They scored 3 goals in 6+ periods. Even with prime Brodeur you're not going to win with that little goal support.

You've made your stance on this abundantly clear. We're just going to disagree. There was no reason to pull the plug prior to game 5. I can buy an argument for game 6 but I would've gone down with Rask too.
Based on the first 9 games of the playoffs, I can't imagine going with anyone but Rask to start Game 5. But I think he should've been pulled quicker. And as staunch a defender of Rask as I've been (I post incredibly infrequently on these boards, but just trust me when I say I've been forced to leave group threads because I get so frustrated with Rask hate), I really can't believe he started game 6.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
Ya, I hate to pour gas on the fire but this series loss wasn't at all about goaltending. I would have gone with Rask if he was healthy yesterday too. With any semblance of even officiating early in the series and some puck luck and the bruins win this going away. I think focusing on Rask is kinda lazy, tbh. It gives you an easy thing to point the finger at and an easy way to solve the problem going forward. "get a better goalie and we win the cup, kehd." There just isnt much evidence that is true.

The problem was similar to what it has been the last few years. The Bruins have a great first line. You can't stop them, you just try to slow them down. The Islanders couldn't stop them despite having one of the best D pairs in the game stapled to them all series. The problem in this series, and in series past, is that if you slow that line down, the bruins struggle to counter. The Krejci line put up a fair amount of chances early in the series but the production lagged behind and the bottom 6 was just overall terrible. Every team in the playoffs has good top 6 players. They have good top 4 D. You win in the playoffs when you can exploit matchups lower in the lineup and the Bruins consistently cannot do that and when the bounces went the other way early in the series, there wasn't enough coming from those 6 guys to make up the gap.
All of these things can be true. The goaltending was glaring towards the end when Rask's injuries fully caught up with him (he had played well, if not great leading up to the last 3-4 games). The officiating was abysmal and the lines not centered by Patrice Bergeron were garbage.

But they scored four goals in game 5 and lost. and basically any mistake ended up in the net from game 4 onward.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
3,017
Boston
I an surprised Sweeney is being totally left off the hook here. The 2015 nhl draft alone should be enough to get him fired. He had 3 shots (picks 13, 14 and 15)at setting up the teams future. If he had even hit on one of them, at the very least the Bruins would be a deeper team right now. Instead he went totally off the expected big board to draft Zboril, DeBrusk and Senshaw passing on Conner and Barzal (think that hurt this series?), both of who were considered better prospects by most. To make matters worse the Islanders then grabbed Beauvillier at pick 28. just flipping the first round with the Islanders in the 2015 draft and its the Bruins advancing IMO. Not to mention a much brighter future.
The 2015 draft is very bad. I’m not going to defend it.

However, Zboril was not an overdraft. Debrusk and Senshyn were. https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-central-scoutings-2015-final-rankings/c-761663

If you think Sweeney should be fired, sure, I can see it.

I don’t, the team has been good and they’ve traded away high picks that would allow for drafting higher end prospects. The bottom 6 were awful but I liked the players initially. Kase and a lot of D injuries hurt. It will be hard to bridge from the Bergeron Era but hopefully they can find a 1C in the next couple years.

For next year, if not swapping out Carlo for a more expensive and slightly worse but less injured player, then I’d love to see a bunch (2 and Hall) of 2nd line wings brought in; go cheap elsewhere with 2C Studnicka and 4C Frederic.

Here’s a draft of forwards for next year
Marchand-Bergy-Smith
Hall-Studnicka-Pasta
Hyman-Coyle-Lazar
Debrusk-Frederic-Wagner
 
Last edited:

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
28,548
306, row 14
He did practice prior to game 5. He took shots prior to the full morning skate. It's not entirely unusual for a player to skip morning skate for maintenance and/or treatment and then play the game.

I don't think there were red flashing warning lights during game 5. The first goal was a Barzal shot from the right circle on the PP that went top side blocker. The 2nd goal Rask had no chance on. Another PPG where a cross ice pass bounced off Clifton's skates to Palmieri who had an open net. 3rd goal was a Bailey one-time from a foot outside the top of the crease which Rask had no chance on. 4th goal was an Eberle wrist shot from the left circle on the PP after Tinordi's stick broke on a clearing attempt. In an ideal world he stops one or both of the Barzal and Eberle shots but those were quality scoring chances by talented players. Those are going to go in sometimes. They went in for the Islanders. They didn't go in for the Bruins. Varlamov ouplayed Rask but I don't think you can put the series on Rask.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
He did practice prior to game 5. He took shots prior to the full morning skate. It's not entirely unusual for a player to skip morning skate for maintenance and/or treatment and then play the game.

I don't think there were red flashing warning lights during game 5. The first goal was a Barzal shot from the right circle on the PP that went top side blocker. The 2nd goal Rask had no chance on. Another PPG where a cross ice pass bounced off Clifton's skates to Palmieri who had an open net. 3rd goal was a Bailey one-time from a foot outside the top of the crease which Rask had no chance on. 4th goal was an Eberle wrist shot from the left circle on the PP after Tinordi's stick broke on a clearing attempt. In an ideal world he stops one or both of the Barzal and Eberle shots but those were quality scoring chances by talented players. Those are going to go in sometimes. They went in for the Islanders. They didn't go in for the Bruins. Varlamov ouplayed Rask but I don't think you can put the series on Rask.
No one said you could put the series on Rask, but I would put a large chunk of games 5 and 6 on him. He was barely mobile. He wasn't able to be as aggressive as he normally is and it cost him, and us.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,028
All of these things can be true. The goaltending was glaring towards the end when Rask's injuries fully caught up with him (he had played well, if not great leading up to the last 3-4 games). The officiating was abysmal and the lines not centered by Patrice Bergeron were garbage.

But they scored four goals in game 5 and lost. and basically any mistake ended up in the net from game 4 onward.
Sure, they can, but my point is I don't think there is a major difference in results here with Swayman in net. most of those mistakes came from the players we're talking about and a lot of the goals the islanders scored were either after 18 bounces landed on someone's stick in the slot or the highest of high danger areas. Zajac's goal last night was 5 feet in front of the goal with no defender. Nelson the same thing. You definitely would like a save on either of those but most goalies are giving up those goals. I just don't think he was all that much of a factor and certainly not close to deserving of the amount of blame he's going to get.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
423
South Dartmouth, MA
No one said you could put the series on Rask, but I would put a large chunk of games 5 and 6 on him. He was barely mobile. He wasn't able to be as aggressive as he normally is and it cost him, and us.
But is that on Rask, or Cassidy? I mean my 71 year old mother, who took a break from whatever MSNBC show she was devouring, watched for 10 minutes on Monday night and asked why he couldn't move and why he was playing.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
12,740
The team hasn't been good?

Last 5 seasons:

2016-17: 44-31-7, 95 points, 3rd in the division, 7th in the conference, lost in the first round
2017-18: 50-20-12, 112 points, 2nd in the division, 2nd in the conference, lost in the second round
2018-19: 49-24-9, 107 points, 2nd in the division, 2nd in the conference, lost in the SCF
2019-20: 44-14-12, 100 points, 1st in the division, 1st in the conference, lost in the second round
2020-21: 33-16-7, 73 points, 3rd in the division, 6th in the conference, lost in the second round

So in the last 5 years, they've consistently been a very good team, and made it to the league's "elite eight" four times, and lost in the SCF in game 7 once.

Of COURSE they've been a good team. A really good team. Not many teams have been as consistently good as them the past five seasons. Some, yes. Not many.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
But is that on Rask, or Cassidy? I mean my 71 year old mother, who took a break from whatever MSNBC show she was devouring, watched for 10 minutes on Monday night and asked why he couldn't move and why he was playing.
100% on Cassidy. Tuukka did what good, proud athletes do - try to play through it. No shame on him, as far as I am concerned.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,228
Sure, they can, but my point is I don't think there is a major difference in results here with Swayman in net. most of those mistakes came from the players we're talking about and a lot of the goals the islanders scored were either after 18 bounces landed on someone's stick in the slot or the highest of high danger areas. Zajac's goal last night was 5 feet in front of the goal with no defender. Nelson the same thing. You definitely would like a save on either of those but most goalies are giving up those goals. I just don't think he was all that much of a factor and certainly not close to deserving of the amount of blame he's going to get.
well, we will never know, and I'm not interested in assuming outcomes. But when a player is so obviously hurt, the coach's job is to sit them.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
3,017
Boston
100% on Cassidy. Tuukka did what good, proud athletes do - try to play through it. No shame on him, as far as I am concerned.
I think it was a hard decision for Cassidy but, ultimately, I’m with you. He made the wrong one.

There were goals last night that a healthy Rask gets. They didn’t lose the series because of Rask. As discussed up thread, he was overall good. (The forwards made them lose)

But they may have had a better chance to win games 5&6 with a different goalie. For game 5, very hard decision. But game 6? I think you can question it.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,006
Gallows Hill
This series came down to the Islanders being able to kick the crap out of the Bruins defenseman to the point where they were injured or ineffective with no worry about being penalized. Where as the Bruins are not allowed to play that style of game anymore. Until they figure out a way to stop this, they’re going to have the same result every year. They are extremely lucky that McAvoy doesn’t need knee surgery after this one.
 

yeahlunchbox

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2008
474
100% on Cassidy. Tuukka did what good, proud athletes do - try to play through it. No shame on him, as far as I am concerned.
He might be the most unpopular athlete in New England since he started here, people will crap on him because he was too hurt to play up to his normal standards the last two games and they would have crapped on him if he asked out.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,028
He might be the most unpopular athlete in New England since he started here, people will crap on him because he was too hurt to play up to his normal standards the last two games and they would have crapped on him if he asked out.
This is how an agenda works. most of the people pushing this narrative know next to nothing about hockey anyway so it doesn't really matter. I don't mean the people in this thread, I'm talking about the mouth breather talk radio people who push this every year because its a convenient talking point.

Want a silver lining guys? We will never have to watch NBC broadcast a bruins game again!
 

LoweTek

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2005
1,847
Central Florida
I don't watch a lot of regular season hockey but I've watched every game of this series. I'm an old goaltender so I'm a bit predisposed not to blame Rask. He surely allowed a few softies but he also bailed the guys out of a ton of mistakes. Goaltending aside, I thought the Bruins looked awful from game 4 through 6. The OT goal in Game 4 was a lot of luck in my view. Isles were buzzing everywhere in all three of these games. Bruins were simply getting beaten, especially in third periods.

I had an old coach in high school who used to say, usually at very high volume, "They're beating you to the puck. You have to beat them to the puck!"

I have found over the years, watching games, being a radio PBP guy on college hockey games and playing, this is an inescapable truism. You can see it happening. What I saw was an effective attack from the first line but the fall off from there was steep. I saw very poor passing decisions, throwing the puck into open lanes the Isles quickly filled, scrambling for meaningful control in both ends. In short, the Bruins were consistently being beaten to the puck, badly.

I must say, as much as I hate singling a player out, I thought Coyle had a horrible series. Pasternak missed some gaping holes in the net too.

I turned to Mrs. LT early in the third period of game 4 and said, "They are going to lose this series. They cannot keep up with the Islander speed and tenacity. They look tired and the Islanders look energized. It reminds me of the third period of the US-Russian game in 1980. The Russians ran out of gas."

The Isles on the other hand were very effective with the first two lines and even the third line was very good. Varlamov sure proved he belongs in a semi-final. The Bruins could not figure him out.

Islanders beat them and beat them thoroughly.
 

ColdSoxPack

lurker
Jul 14, 2005
1,157
Simi Valley, CA
I don't watch a lot of regular season hockey but I've watched every game of this series. I'm an old goaltender so I'm a bit predisposed not to blame Rask. He surely allowed a few softies but he also bailed the guys out of a ton of mistakes. Goaltending aside, I thought the Bruins looked awful from game 4 through 6. The OT goal in Game 4 was a lot of luck in my view. Isles were buzzing everywhere in all three of these games. Bruins were simply getting beaten, especially in third periods.

I had an old coach in high school who used to say, usually at very high volume, "They're beating you to the puck. You have to beat them to the puck!"

I have found over the years, watching games, being a radio PBP guy on college hockey games and playing, this is an inescapable truism. You can see it happening. What I saw was an effective attack from the first line but the fall off from there was steep. I saw very poor passing decisions, throwing the puck into open lanes the Isles quickly filled, scrambling for meaningful control in both ends. In short, the Bruins were consistently being beaten to the puck, badly.

I must say, as much as I hate singling a player out, I thought Coyle had a horrible series. Pasternak missed some gaping holes in the net too.

I turned to Mrs. LT early in the third period of game 4 and said, "They are going to lose this series. They cannot keep up with the Islander speed and tenacity. They look tired and the Islanders look energized. It reminds me of the third period of the US-Russian game in 1980. The Russians ran out of gas."

The Isles on the other hand were very effective with the first two lines and even the third line was very good. Varlamov sure proved he belongs in a semi-final. The Bruins could not figure him out.

Islanders beat them and beat them thoroughly.
Thank you for this. We did get beat. We did look tired and slow. We should tip our hats to the Islanders. It is probably too late to go back and play the Penguins instead.