On April 14 2012 13:43 Sub40APM wrote: The CBC commentators are despicable scumbags, blaming Luongo on this ?! The entire D corps has its head up their ass, Bieksa, Hamhuis and Ballard need to be down in the AHL but CBC wants Scneider in game 3??? Disguising. [And I am not a Canuck fan at all]
They weren't blaming Luongo for it. Schneider is worth mentioning regardless of how Luongo played just because the team usually rally's around him. They need a shot of adrenaline from somewhere.
Either way, Vancouver only has themselves to blame. It doesn't matter if you outplay the other team for 2/3rds of the game when you're giving up shorthanded goals and fail to even pose a threat on the powerplay.
Game 3 here we go.
GolemMadness Canada. April 14 2012 13:58. Posts 4896
Honestly its getting annoying going on facebook and people still defending Luongo. I've been following every canucks game for a long time, and most of the western conference as well. Luongo easily has top 2-3 worst rebound control and general puck awareness in comparison to Quick, and many other goalies.
The differences in the scores is simply the amount of bad rebound chances given up by Luongo in comparison to Quick. That's really all there is to it. Quick controls rebounds much better than Luongo. Luongo just flops everytime he sees a puck, giving up 2nd and 3rd chances... 3rd and 4th goal today were both perfect examples of that.
You are blaming Luongo for the third goal? When there are 3 guys around him just poking the puck in? And the 4th? Malhotra passes it to Lewis for god's sake. I hate Luongo like any normal human being but the last two games the guy actually showed up while 'the best defensive corps in the league' has been just awful.
But in the end the real problem is having a weasel like Gillis in charge of the Canucks. Every move he has ever made has been horrible. Either immoral, not letting Naslund retire as a Canuck, or stupid, good thing they got Ballard for all those young forwards right?, to just outright bizzare, hey hows Kassian's 'toughness' working out?.
JimmyJRaynor Canada. April 14 2012 15:43. Posts 1625
Visitors who win the first two games are 56-18 in the NHL playoffs in all rounds, and 16-9 in the round of 16. In fact, only 18 times in NHL history has a team won a series after losing the first two games at home:
The Canucks are in some trouble... Up against the wall of injuries, getting physically manhandled and with a couple injuries mixed with that Kassian/Hodgson they suddenly they have no scoring depth at all. Positionally the Kings are just superior, maybe the Canucks are "controlling the play" but the Kings aren't letting them get any chances.
Perhaps part of that is the Canucks not willing to go to the hard areas, but seeing how they get steam rolled everytime the try it isn't really that surprising.
But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake
The Canucks are in trouble but I blame AV as much as the players... Daniel goes down and Lapierre slots in and does well on that line. Higgins, Booth and Kesler were great earlier in the year. Raymond can't score to save his life but the upside has been his defensive play.
So why the hell aren't the lines: Burrows, Sedin, Lapierre Booth, Kesler, Higgins Raymond, Phalson, Hanson Kassian, Malhotra, Ebbett
Top line will have 2 natural centers to take face offs on either side in the offensive zone. Higgins gives life to every line he's on and Booth is actually playing decent. 3rd line can play shut down because they aren't expecting Phalson (they were probably shocked his line were the only producers since they are supposed to be the "shut down" line) or Raymond to score.
Defense is a mess but the best pairings would still have to be: Bieksa, Hamhuis Salo, Edler Ballard, Tanev
At least the diving was to a minimum last game. I'm a huge Canucks fan but I can't stand when the Canucks think they are playing soccer...
This is exactly like the series 2 years ago. Special teams are killing us against the Kings and if we don't figure that out there is no chance at all.
A woman is a lot like a refrigerator. 6 feet tall, 300 pounds... it makes ice.
GolemMadness Canada. April 15 2012 08:22. Posts 4896
On April 15 2012 05:54 iCanada wrote: Visitors who win the first two games are 56-18 in the NHL playoffs in all rounds, and 16-9 in the round of 16. In fact, only 18 times in NHL history has a team won a series after losing the first two games at home:
Wait, so they're 18-56 and yet despite that have only won 18 times in history?
NadaSound United States. April 15 2012 08:52. Posts 224
On April 15 2012 05:54 iCanada wrote: Visitors who win the first two games are 56-18 in the NHL playoffs in all rounds, and 16-9 in the round of 16. In fact, only 18 times in NHL history has a team won a series after losing the first two games at home:
Wait, so they're 18-56 and yet despite that have only won 18 times in history?
A team losing their first two home game like never happens. Consider there are 16 playoff series per year, so over 75 years the NHL been in effect that is 1200 playoff series... take out about 300-400 I guess since back in the day the first round was a best of three.
The other factor is that the highest seed always gets home advantage and the first two games as well, so them losing those games is rather unlikely, considering how the home team statistically wins about 70% of the time in the NHL playoffs... I suppose a big part of that is that the higher seeds always play more home games, though...
But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake
Fight! Fight! Fight! Lots of bad blood in the games tonight, this has to be one of the most intense first rounds ever! I don't think the Yotes, and Hawks will get into the scraps though.
Brood War forever!
JimmyJRaynor Canada. April 15 2012 11:41. Posts 1625
A team losing their first two home game like never happens. Consider there are 16 playoff series per year, so over 75 years the NHL been in effect that is 1200 playoff series... take out about 300-400 I guess since back in the day the first round was a best of three.
ummm in like 1967 there were only 6 teams in the league and 2 play off rounds... and a total of 3 series. then i think in 1968 there were still only 3 series that were BO7.
You think the Leafs played through 4 series to win the Cup? Ha!
Last edit: 2012-04-15 11:50:04
Will Sundance Digiovanni become the Vince Mcmahon of eSports?
On April 15 2012 11:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I know this is an NHL Playoff thread.... but there is a better brand of Hockey being played with more open ice and far less head injuries...
Congratz to Canada's Women for taking home the Gold!
Although Canada eaked out an overtime win for the gold this year.. the USA women have been better over all during the past 5 years.
I wouldn't say that Women's International hockey is better, it is a 2 horse race between the USA and Canada, which is not that exciting considering none of the games really matter until these two meet in the championship game(they are good games when these two meet, but other than that it is very boring to watch). Grats to Team Canada though!
Store
JimmyJRaynor Canada. April 14 2012 15:43. Posts 1625![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/x7JLp.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://cjzero.com/gifs/DubiGatorade.gif)
