if the Habs don't get a lucky overtime goal in game 3, it's a four game sweep, how about that angle?
- jimbro83

and if Carey Price was not injured in game one then we might not be having this conversation at all

this seems inappropriate
- jimbro83

What... you want sympathy after being rather inappropriate yourself?

and if Carey Price was not injured in game one then we might not be having this conversation at all
- kasperrko

because goaltending was the reason the Habs scored 5 goals in their 4 losses

and if Carey Price was not injured in game one then we might not be having this conversation at all
- kasperrko

I do believe him between the pipes would have made for a different series.
The team plays with more confidence in front of him. They know they can take chances and he's likely to bail them out.
Tokarski played outstanding... but the team seemed more tentative in front of him.

because goaltending was the reason the Habs scored 5 goals in their 4 losses
- jimbro83

Dude...you are writing the "How Not to React When Your Team is Going to the Cup Finals" blog before our eyes.

In case you forgot...the Rangers won.

Dude...you are writing the "How Not to React When Your Team is Going to the Cup Finals" blog before our eyes.

In case you forgot...the Rangers won.
- icedog97

He's being respectful... he said so himself

because goaltending was the reason the Habs scored 5 goals in their 4 losses
- jimbro83

No but he is the face of that team and I believe the team would have played better not only that but the Rangers would not have scored much. Rangers always had problems with Price and well they took out the one guy that held the Canadiens together.

Dude...you are writing the "How Not to React When Your Team is Going to the Cup Finals" blog before our eyes.

In case you forgot...the Rangers won.
- icedog97

nah not really

No but he is the face of that team and I believe the team would have played better not only that but the Rangers would not have scored much. Rangers always had problems with Price and well they took out the one guy that held the Canadiens together.
- kasperrko

ding ding ding
give the man a prize!

I do believe him between the pipes would have made for a different series.
The team plays with more confidence in front of him. They know they can take chances and he's likely to bail them out.
Tokarski played outstanding... but the team seemed more tentative in front of him.
- mlindsay

I totally agree. I think Tokarski played great but you can tell the Canadiens were not going full throttle with him in net playing a more defensive minded game

Pretty hard to take a writer seriously when he refers to many of his readers as "Dumb" and "Stupid". Especially a writer who makes such basic spelling mistakes! You really need to expand your vocabulary. I agree with what was written but find this article horribly written and "Stupid"!

No but he is the face of that team and I believe the team would have played better not only that but the Rangers would not have scored much. Rangers always had problems with Price and well they took out the one guy that held the Canadiens together.
- kasperrko

so should we look at every playoff series over the years and figure out if a team were missing a big player due to injury and call them null and void? gonna be a lot of work

ding ding ding
give the man a prize!
- mlindsay

Jonathan Quick is next if LA makes to be taken out or Kane or Towes if Chicago makes it

so should we look at every playoff series over the years and figure out if a team were missing a big player due to injury and call them null and void? gonna be a lot of work
- jimbro83

so are you admitting that the Rangers deliberately took out Price???

New York was just better and is the deserving Eastern rep to be in the Finals. Doesn't matter anyway as LA or CHI will steamroll the Final!

so are you admitting that the Rangers deliberately took out Price???
- kasperrko

nope, I am still pissed we didn't get a penalty shot on the play

because goaltending was the reason the Habs scored 5 goals in their 4 losses
- jimbro83

Price's puck handling skills are one thing that is being overlooked here. It can change the way opposing teams enter the offensive zone because he is that good with the puck. They may have still lost with Price in nets but you can be sure their defensive zone breakouts and puck recovery would have been much better and as such, the game would have been played differently.

nope, I am still pissed we didn't get penalty shot on the play
- jimbro83

Talk about sour grapes

I agree with everything in the article, from the performance of the team to Vanek, at the exception of one comment made in the second part of the post. There is acutally such a thing as being "clutch" players like Bergeron, krejci, Franzen, Datsyuk, Subban, Karlsson, Toews, Hossa...they are all very clutch players, compared them to the likes of other players like Thorton, he simply is the furthest thing away from clutch.

I do, however, agree with you that you can't base a judgement out of a 7 game sample, that is very short sided. However, after 10 years in the NHL, or after making the playoffs many times, you expect a player to improve from off season to off season. I haven't looked into Vanek to be completely honest, but I would say if he does have more than 3 years in post season experience and his statistics in the post season have been degrading, he would definitely fall under the "not clutch" category.

nah not really
- jimbro83

Again...the piece is about over analyzing and placing blame from the Canadiens fan/media point of view.

It suggests some valid reasons why NOT to do that.

It clearly isn't a "my team lost and I hate the Rangers" blog.
It clearly isn't a "the Rangers don't deserve to have won" blog.

But your first comment...from a fan of the team that won and will play for the cup...

"wow, this blog is chock full of sour grapes, OMG"

Again...the piece is about over analyzing and placing blame from the Canadiens fan/media point of view.

It suggests some valid reasons why NOT to do that.

It clearly isn't a "my team lost and I hate the Rangers" blog.
It clearly isn't a "the Rangers don't deserve to have won" blog.

But your first comment...from a fan of the team that won and will play for the cup...

"wow, this blog is chock full of sour grapes, OMG"
- icedog97

well, you are not taking into account all his other blogs in this series then, which I am

well, you are not taking into account all his other blogs in this series then, which I am
- jimbro83

Should we look back at all your trash too?

Should we look back at all your trash too?
- mlindsay

Don't bother like me he is from New York and whether we are winning or losing we always find something to complain about. Just the way it is. IF they win the cup I am sure he will complain too about some penalty or blog

Pretty hard to take a writer seriously when he refers to many of his readers as "Dumb" and "Stupid". Especially a writer who makes such basic spelling mistakes! You really need to expand your vocabulary. I agree with what was written but find this article horribly written and "Stupid"!
- Breggs

What spelling mistakes? I went back after you said this, and I got to say, considering that I have no editor, and unlike something I might write for a newspaper, I didn't get the chance put the article on ice for a few hours and come back at it with fresh eyes.

This is not a complaint - blogging is what it is. But - there were 2 spelling mistakes. One was the word "incessantly" which due to a spell check mis-click went in as "insistently" and the other was "Lundqvist" which is as hard a name to spell as their is!

So, come on, cut me some slack dude!

And I did not call anyone stupid or dumb. I just said a popular narrative was dumb. It is necessary to do so or those narratives become "reality." Sorry to offend, but I will call all dumb narratives dumb as long as they continue to present themselves, which will be always.

I agree with everything in the article, from the performance of the team to Vanek, at the exception of one comment made in the second part of the post. There is acutally such a thing as being "clutch" players like Bergeron, krejci, Franzen, Datsyuk, Subban, Karlsson, Toews, Hossa...they are all very clutch players, compared them to the likes of other players like Thorton, he simply is the furthest thing away from clutch.

I do, however, agree with you that you can't base a judgement out of a 7 game sample, that is very short sided. However, after 10 years in the NHL, or after making the playoffs many times, you expect a player to improve from off season to off season. I haven't looked into Vanek to be completely honest, but I would say if he does have more than 3 years in post season experience and his statistics in the post season have been degrading, he would definitely fall under the "not clutch" category.
- PtotheY

You are entitled to believe in clutch, and you are not alone. Most people do. However, your examples were all star players - they are the best players in preseason games too, so I am not sure that proves anything.

Even Joe Thorton, to say he is a choker is unfair. He has happened to play on a lot of losing playoff teams, and he has maybe not scored as many points in the playoffs as his career totals suggest, but if you look at it from a bigger picture perspective - out of say 10 star players the odds are one of them will happen to have low totals in important games and Joe just happens to be that guy.

Despite his rep, I would still want Thornton on my team and I have no doubt he is bound to have a great playoffs one of these days.