2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

[bronconick]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Seriously, Hawks, you had one job.

 

[Jimjamesak]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Let's get ready for a NY-LA dbag off...

 

[bronconick]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Dustin Brown and Jarret Stoll getting another Cup. Lovely.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Because none of them were his fault?

The biggest canard in hockey. Every single time some goalie gives up 3 goals on 4 shots or 4 goals on 6 shots or 5 goals on 4 shots (I swear I saw a Notre Dame goalie do that once) this excuse gets trotted out. I've seen plenty of goalies (Crawford included) who make saves on some of those shots. Sure the team played poorly, but so did Crawford. In fact if I was portioning out the blame I'd give a little more to the goalie for last night. They wear the big glove and carry the big stick for a reason.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

According to the AP article the Hawks are 1 for 24 on the power play away from home. Tough to win with numbers like that.

 

[Bomber]

According to the AP article the Hawks are 1 for 24 on the power play away from home. Tough to win with numbers like that.

And giving up 2+ PP goals a game. A deadly combo.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

The biggest canard in hockey. Every single time some goalie gives up 3 goals on 4 shots or 4 goals on 6 shots or 5 goals on 4 shots (I swear I saw a Notre Dame goalie do that once) this excuse gets trotted out. I've seen plenty of goalies (Crawford included) who make saves on some of those shots. Sure the team played poorly, but so did Crawford. In fact if I was portioning out the blame I'd give a little more to the goalie for last night. They wear the big glove and carry the big stick for a reason.

The biggest canard in hockey is reflexively blaming one player - usually the goalie, but sometimes the captain or the high skill player - for a team failure. It's simplistic and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the game. It's what the meatball fans at the bar do.

The Hawks are getting outworked out executed and out (puck) lucked, not just by the Kings in this series, but by the Wild and the Blues before and for much of the regular season. Whatever the reason(s), it's a team wide malaise that has been evident.

Which of the 4 goals last night should Crawford have had?

In objectively watching the replays (instead of looking for a scapegoat), I don't see any.

Would you like one or two of those to hit him? Sure, but you can't count on puck luck and the absence of puck luck can hardly be blamed on Crow or any other player for that matter.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Dustin Brown and Jarret Stoll getting another Cup. Lovely.

Makes you feel warm and fuzzy and that life is fair and full of justice??

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

The biggest canard in hockey is reflexively blaming one player - usually the goalie, but sometimes the captain or the high skill player - for a team failure. It's simplistic and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the game. It's what the meatball fans at the bar do.

The Hawks are getting outworked out executed and out (puck) lucked, not just by the Kings in this series, but by the Wild and the Blues before and for much of the regular season. Whatever the reason(s), it's a team wide malaise that has been evident.

Which of the 4 goals last night should Crawford have had?

In objectively watching the replays (instead of looking for a scapegoat), I don't see any.

Would you like one or two of those to hit him? Sure, but you can't count on puck luck and the absence of puck luck can hardly be blamed on Crow or any other player for that matter.

once again, as you so frequently do, you missed the point. You are the one repeating a tired point that when a goalie lets in lots of goals on hardly any shots, it never seems to be the fault of the goalie. Talk about a meatball response. As I said I've seen goalies make saves on SOME of those shots. Yes, sometimes it isn't his fault. Had Crawford stood on his head and made a couple of key saves, perhaps that's a 2-2 game in the third or a 3-2 game with the Hawks knowing they can pull it out. and FWIW, I'd bet my life I understand the game quite well enough, and probably far better than you.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

once again, as you so frequently do, you missed the point. You are the one repeating a tired point that when a goalie lets in lots of goals on hardly any shots, it never seems to be the fault of the goalie. Talk about a meatball response. As I said I've seen goalies make saves on SOME of those shots. Yes, sometimes it isn't his fault. Had Crawford stood on his head and made a couple of key saves, perhaps that's a 2-2 game in the third or a 3-2 game with the Hawks knowing they can pull it out. and FWIW, I'd bet my life I understand the game quite well enough, and probably far better than you.

I've seen goalies make some of those saves too, including Crawford. I've seen Quick let in soft goals. What's your point, that the Hawks - the defending champs with that roster - should have to rely on a goalie standing on his head? They already did that in rounds 1 and 2.

And I never said that it's never the fault of the goalie or Crawford - just that it wasn't last night. Again, which one should he have had?

I can point out any number of gaffes by the other players on the ice that led to those goals.

Talk about someone missing the point...

 

[CLS]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Makes you feel warm and fuzzy and that life is fair and full of justice??

Claude Lemieux has his name on the cup multiple times. Ulf Samuelson has a shot to win it as a player and as a coach. Life ain’t fair.

The biggest canard in hockey. Every single time some goalie gives up 3 goals on 4 shots or 4 goals on 6 shots or 5 goals on 4 shots (I swear I saw a Notre Dame goalie do that once) this excuse gets trotted out. I've seen plenty of goalies (Crawford included) who make saves on some of those shots. Sure the team played poorly, but so did Crawford. In fact if I was portioning out the blame I'd give a little more to the goalie for last night. They wear the big glove and carry the big stick for a reason.

The biggest canard in hockey is reflexively blaming one player - usually the goalie, but sometimes the captain or the high skill player - for a team failure. It's simplistic and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the game. It's what the meatball fans at the bar do.

The Hawks are getting outworked out executed and out (puck) lucked, not just by the Kings in this series, but by the Wild and the Blues before and for much of the regular season. Whatever the reason(s), it's a team wide malaise that has been evident.

Which of the 4 goals last night should Crawford have had?

In objectively watching the replays (instead of looking for a scapegoat), I don't see any.

Would you like one or two of those to hit him? Sure, but you can't count on puck luck and the absence of puck luck can hardly be blamed on Crow or any other player for that matter.

Don’t know about canards, but one thing that drives me nuts is when a goalie’s pulled and the color guy says “[He’s not playing badly]/[None of the goals were his fault] but the coach is trying to [shake up]/[wake up] the team,” and that’s exactly what would have been said last night. It’s like saying “Player X isn’t playing that badly, but he’s being benched in favor of [inferior player] to wake up the team.” Why? Especially with a veteran team and a veteran goalie that the veteran team has confidence in.

I admit that I don’t know anything about the Hawks backup goalie, but I’m guessing that he’s the backup goalie for a reason – probably because he’s not as good as Crawford. And unless a superior goalie has been hiding in the weeds in the AHL (Tokarski? After game four, doesn’t look like it to me), or at Cornell, it makes no sense to put in an inferior goalie.

In hindsight, it looks to me like Quenneville’s (non-)decision was correct; Crawford made several good saves and the Blackhawks controlled the end of the game and made the outcome interesting. I doubt that the backup could have done better or that the team would have played better with the backup in the game.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Don’t know about canards, but one thing that drives me nuts is when a goalie’s pulled and the color guy says “[He’s not playing badly]/[None of the goals were his fault] but the coach is trying to [shake up]/[wake up] the team,” and that’s exactly what would have been said last night. It’s like saying “Player X isn’t playing that badly, but he’s being benched in favor of [inferior player] to wake up the team.” Why? Especially with a veteran team and a veteran goalie that the veteran team has confidence in.

I admit that I don’t know anything about the Hawks backup goalie, but I’m guessing that he’s the backup goalie for a reason – probably because he’s not as good as Crawford. And unless a superior goalie has been hiding in the weeds in the AHL (Tokarski? After game four, doesn’t look like it to me), or at Cornell, it makes no sense to put in an inferior goalie.

In hindsight, it looks to me like Quenneville’s (non-)decision was correct; Crawford made several good saves and the Blackhawks controlled the end of the game and made the outcome interesting. I doubt that the backup could have done better or that the team would have played better with the backup in the game.

Anti Raanta (the backup) played pretty well when he first came up and took over for an injured Crawford. Since that time he was shaky down the stretch in spot duty.

The only way I could see Q justifying that move would be to try and inspire his defense to play better in their own zone and not allow the Kings free reign like what we saw last night.

Like you, I believe the correct choice was what happened last night. Doubtful that Raanta pitches a shutout from that point on.

 

[JF_Gophers]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

I don't think I'd care about a Rangers/Kings cup final.

 

[CLS]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

I don't think I'd care about a Rangers/Kings cup final.

On the other hand, NBC might. Two largest TV markets. They're assured of a top three US market and/or a large Canadian market that actually cares about the NHL.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

On the other hand, NBC might. Two largest TV markets. They're assured of a top three US market and/or a large Canadian market that actually cares about the NHL.

The vast majority of Montreal fans will not be watching NBC for the finals if their team makes it. NBC wants NYR and (probably) Chicago, seeing as how nobody knew LA had fans before they won the Cup a few years ago.

 

[Bigus Paulus]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

On the other hand, NBC might. Two largest TV markets. They're assured of a top three US market and/or a large Canadian market that actually cares about the NHL.

If NBC really believes bigger market = bigger ratings they may be in for a rude awakening. I've been living in LA for many years now and Kings fanbase isn't all that large. Sure they'll get a bunch of bandwagon fans if they make it to the Cup final, but I would find it hard to believe that LA would bring in bigger ratings numbers than Chicago.

This isn't the Lakers-Knicks or Dodgers-Yankees dream LA vs NYC matchup.

 

[CLS]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

The vast majority of Montreal fans will not be watching NBC for the finals if their team makes it. NBC wants NYR and (probably) Chicago, seeing as how nobody knew LA had fans before they won the Cup a few years ago.

Who'd be broadcasting it? Last night, the NBC crew mentioned that last night's game was TSN's final broadcast. From that, I assumed that NBC had an exclusive (either directly or through some sort of syndication) from here on out.

If NBC really believes bigger market = bigger ratings they may be in for a rude awakening. I've been living in LA for many years now and Kings fanbase isn't all that large. Sure they'll get a bunch of bandwagon fans if they make it to the Cup final, but I would find it hard to believe that LA would bring in bigger ratings numbers than Chicago.

This isn't the Lakers-Knicks or Dodgers-Yankees dream LA vs NYC matchup.

Probably true. But a miniscule portion of the LA market is better than, for example, a small portion of the Columbus market.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

I don't think I'd care about a Rangers/Kings cup final.

I lost all interest when I heard the final four teams would be from Canada, Los Angeles, New York, and Chicago. Pass.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Who'd be broadcasting it? Last night, the NBC crew mentioned that last night's game was TSN's final broadcast. From that, I assumed that NBC had an exclusive (either directly or through some sort of syndication) from here on out.

Unless I'm completely off the mark here, NBC does not broadcast in Canada. If TSN is not broadcasting anymore games, then I'd place my wager on CBC picking up the remainder of the playoff games in Canada.

 

[SteveP]

Re: 2014 Stanley Cup - Don't Toews me, man!!!

Who'd be broadcasting it? Last night, the NBC crew mentioned that last night's game was TSN's final broadcast. From that, I assumed that NBC had an exclusive (either directly or through some sort of syndication) from here on out.

Hockey Night in Canada has the final no matter which teams are in. NBC can be picked up over the air in many border areas, but not on cable or sat.