sidewinder Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 Some ugly post-game riots in Vancouver last night. Not cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 Assuming the B's hold on for another ten minutes, I'm not sure there will ever be a more deserving winner of the Conn Symthe trophy than Tim Thomas. I don't think I've ever seen a goaltender perform at this high a level over such a long stretch of the most important games any hockey team ever plays. Ever hear of Mike Richter, or Marty Brodeur, for that matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Bresnahan Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 I'm a very happy man today. The Bruins finally did it. Almost makes up for Glen Wesley missing that open net... when was that again? Oh yeah, 1990, the last time Boston was in the Stanley Cup finals. I wish my old man was still around. One of the biggest Bruins fans around. He would've loved this. I hope he had a good view from where he is now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalupa Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 Some ugly post-game riots in Vancouver last night. Not cool. Strange that in the USA we save the rioting/looting/violence for celebrating championships not losing them. I can understand being pissed off and wanting to destroy things but the whole,"Hey we just won the ______________ now let's go destroy our downtown," mentality is something I'll never get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave James Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 (edited) Assuming the B's hold on for another ten minutes, I'm not sure there will ever be a more deserving winner of the Conn Symthe trophy than Tim Thomas. I don't think I've ever seen a goaltender perform at this high a level over such a long stretch of the most important games any hockey team ever plays. Ever hear of Mike Richter, or Marty Brodeur, for that matter? Please. Ever hear of Glenn Hall or Terry Sawchuk or Johnny Bower or Ken Dryden or Jacques Plante or Frank Brimsek or Bill Durnam or Harry Lumley or Gump Worsley or Turk Broda of any of a dozen other guys I could name? If you think Richter or Brodeur played better than Tim Thomas in an SCF, that's fine. I just don't have to agree. Remind me again, how many teams have had to win a game seven three times (with two of the three being shutouts) before they could claim the hardware? That's due in no small part to the efforts of Mr. Thomas. Edited June 16, 2011 by Dave James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:.impossible Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 Heroic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Basten II Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 Assuming the B's hold on for another ten minutes, I'm not sure there will ever be a more deserving winner of the Conn Symthe trophy than Tim Thomas. I don't think I've ever seen a goaltender perform at this high a level over such a long stretch of the most important games any hockey team ever plays. Ever hear of Mike Richter, or Marty Brodeur, for that matter? Please. Ever hear of Glenn Hall or Terry Sawchuk or Johnny Bower or Ken Dryden or Jacques Plante or Frank Brimsek or Bill Durnam or Harry Lumley or Gump Worsley or Turk Broda of any of a dozen other guys I could name. If you think Richter or Brodeur played better than Tim Thomas in an SCF, that's fine. I just don't have to agree. Remind me again, how many teams have had to win a game seven three time before they could claim the hardware? That's due in no small part to the efforts of Mr. Thomas. Try Patrick Roy, he won two cups with a very very limited cast around him. in Montreal. By the way kudos to the rioters in Vacouver, thank to them we no longer have the bill for the dumbest hockey fans here in Montreal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 So, the lesson here is that ALL goalies who lead their teams to the promised land have to play exceptionally well, no? Tim Thomas is, well, no exception. And yes, Mr. James, I have heard of ALL the goalies you mention, hockey being my favorite sport by far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:.impossible Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 I have a feeling you guys are going to solve this with an argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papsrus Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 Thomas and that mattress he wears under his jersey played well. He did play well and deserves the Conn Smythe. Happy for him. He seems like a down to earth dude. But Luongo played very poorly in all four losses. The three goals the Bruins got on him in Game 7 were not exactly highlight-reel gems. And in previous games the Bruins were all over Luongo's weak glove side, high. Another real difference in the series from where I sit was that Boston was able to take advantage of Vancouver's seemingly passive defensive scheme: the Bruins were often able to move the puck through the neutral zone and over the blue line virtually without being challenged. Once inside the zone, the Bruins often were able apply sustained pressure, or at least keep the puck in the Vancouver zone and cause havoc. It was all the Canucks could do to get the puck out of their own zone sometimes, and when they did, the Bruins would either challenge them every step of the way through the neutral zone, or gobble up the puck themselves and regroup for another attack. OTOH, when Vancouver attacked it was often one-and-done for them. Not a lot of sustained pressure. It would come in spurts, but by and large, they couldn't seem to mount many sustained attacks. The Sedin twins, the crown jewels of their offense, were a non-factor, really. It also seemed like as soon as Boston got up a goal, the Canucks became much more tentative offensively, and defensively, for that matter. It was a good series, but not one of the great ones, IMHO. The schmucks who tore up the town afterward are losers. Apparently, thousands of people have signed up through a facebook and twitter campaign to help clean up the mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Tapscott Posted June 16, 2011 Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 Canucks fan here. I was hoping they would win (1st Stanley Cup, Canadian based team, etc. though the Bruins actually have more Canadian-born players). But I've got to say, the Canucks blew it big time. They SUCKED. After the Bruins first goal last night, they just packed it in. It was like they were the road team. Luongo and the Sedins, give me a break, they were awful. And the Bruins played it perfectly. The Canucks were outplayed and BADLY outcoached. Not having two centers on for the face-off that led to the Bruins first goal was a major blunder. Sometimes the Bruins had THREE centers out for defensive zone face-offs. Vigneault was deer-in-the headlights the whole series. Wasn't able to adjust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregK Posted June 17, 2011 Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 Assuming the B's hold on for another ten minutes, I'm not sure there will ever be a more deserving winner of the Conn Symthe trophy than Tim Thomas. I don't think I've ever seen a goaltender perform at this high a level over such a long stretch of the most important games any hockey team ever plays. Wow. Just a SLIGHT exaggeration, there. Two, three years from now, it will be Tim who? He's a decent goalie, but clearly Vancouver was kept off their game by Boston's more physical game and superior defense. It's not like Thomas had to face the '84-'85 Oilers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave James Posted June 17, 2011 Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 Assuming the B's hold on for another ten minutes, I'm not sure there will ever be a more deserving winner of the Conn Symthe trophy than Tim Thomas. I don't think I've ever seen a goaltender perform at this high a level over such a long stretch of the most important games any hockey team ever plays. Wow. Just a SLIGHT exaggeration, there. Two, three years from now, it will be Tim who? He's a decent goalie, but clearly Vancouver was kept off their game by Boston's more physical game and superior defense. It's not like Thomas had to face the '84-'85 Oilers! OK, tell who has played better and more consistently in the modern era over the course of this many games in the Stanley Cup playoffs. We are talking about three of Boston's four series going the distance and a goalie who not only set the record for the most playoff saves in Cup history, but who also carded a .937 save percentage and a 2.07 GPA over the 24 games he played prior to last night. Where I come from, that ain't bad. Further, no one is suggesting that Tim Thomas is one of the all-time greats. He isn't. Nonetheless, I will continue to argue that in this year's playoffs, and especially in the finals, he was about as good as you can get. There are only two reasons you wouldn't agree. Either you were not watching the same set of games I did or you see the game differently than I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzmoose Posted June 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 I agree that Thomas is just a decent goalie, but in this series, he was awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papsrus Posted June 17, 2011 Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 Oh yeah, he was great. He made a diving save in the Lightning series that was spectacular, as good as any you'll ever see. But the fact that the Bruins had to go 7 games in three out of four series indicates he wasn't "dominant" throughout. Tampa Bay did light him up pretty good (scoring 5 goals in four different games ... I think he played all those games, yes?). While he was solid in the finals for sure (except for that overtime gaffe in Game 2), the Bruins really just outplayed the Canucks in front of him, limiting Vancouver to a lot of long-range shots, giving them poor shooting angles, blocking a lot of shots in front of him, keeping things to the outside nicely, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.D. Posted June 17, 2011 Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 I no longer have TV, so didn't see any of the games, but all this talk of Luongo's weakness high on the glove side is very puzzling, even paradoxical... I played hockey until age 40 (granted, at rec. league level), and we of course didn't have scouting books, but glove side high was always the very last place I'd think of shooting, on any goaltender. Kids of my generation grew up playing a lot of sports (including of course baseball), and a decent glove hand was pretty much a given. I'd almost go so far as to say that a goalie with a subpar glove must be lacking some of the basic hand-eye coordination required to be a good keeper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papsrus Posted June 17, 2011 Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 I no longer have TV, so didn't see any of the games, but all this talk of Luongo's weakness high on the glove side is very puzzling, even paradoxical... I played hockey until age 40 (granted, at rec. league level), and we of course didn't have scouting books, but glove side high was always the very last place I'd think of shooting, on any goaltender. Kids of my generation grew up playing a lot of sports (including of course baseball), and a decent glove hand was pretty much a given. I'd almost go so far as to say that a goalie with a subpar glove must be lacking some of the basic hand-eye coordination required to be a good keeper. I think I've been one of those making that observation here. But it's nothing new, I don't think. Google "Luongo weak glove side" and you'll find a lot of discussion about it. He's primarily a butterfly goalie to begin with, so he's covering the low part of the net first. He also tends to keep his glove low while in his normal stance. From one discussion of this elsewhere: We wrote here after Game 3 that the Bruins did a good job exposing Luongo’s weak glove — three of Monday’s goals beat the netminder high to the glove side. Ryder continued that trend in Game 4 when he snapped off a fluttering shot that Luongo just waved at with the leather. Luongo might’ve been screened a bit by his own defenseman, but it was still a shot he should’ve had. It wasn’t a rocket and it wasn’t a snipe — it was actually only about two feet off the ice. Not every shot high-glove is going to go in, but the Bruins would be well-advised to keep shooting there until Luongo proves he can stop it. Bottom line with him, though, is he didn't play well, whether it be a weakness to his glove side or just generally letting in some goals that maybe he shouldn't have. The Bruins weren't exactly a scoring machine, after all. Until they faced Luongo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.D. Posted June 17, 2011 Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 Thanks. I didn't doubt your assertions, and I've seen talk of the glove weakness all over sports websites. It just seems extremely weird to me that a world-class goaltender (or at least marginally world-class; he did play a critical Olympic gold-medal match, although he went into the tourney as Canada's backup) would have a fairly glaring flaw in that area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave James Posted June 17, 2011 Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 (edited) For your consideration, here's a compilation of Tim Thomas saves from both the playoffs and the regular season. When this guy is on his game, he is really something: http://www.wimp.com/timthomas/ Edited June 17, 2011 by Dave James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzmoose Posted June 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 I have a feeling you guys are going to solve this with an argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalupa Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 (edited) WHOA! The Flyers just pulled off two trades. One sending away Jeff Carter for Jakub Voracek plus a first(8th overall) and a third round pick. The other one is captain Michael Richards for Brayden Schenn and Wayne Simmonds. Mind reeling.... http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=6697235 http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=6697424 Edited June 23, 2011 by J.H. Deeley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzmoose Posted June 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 I was hoping Couture would get the Calder, but it ended up the way I expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.D. Posted June 24, 2011 Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 (edited) WHOA! The Flyers just pulled off two trades. One sending away Jeff Carter for Jakub Voracek plus a first(8th overall) and a third round pick. The other one is captain Michael Richards for Brayden Schenn and Wayne Simmonds. Mind reeling.... Dude, you called it above re. "Ilyadelphia"... Edited June 24, 2011 by T.D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GA Russell Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 The Chicago fellow Hulsizer who was going to buy the Phoenix Coyotes has dropped out after the City of Glendale wanted to open it up for bids again. The league insists that the value of the team is at least $170 million, and no one is wiling to pay anything like that. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/potential-owner-runs-out-of-patience-with-phoenix-coyotes/article2078048/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave James Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 The Chicago fellow Hulsizer who was going to buy the Phoenix Coyotes has dropped out after the City of Glendale wanted to open it up for bids again. The league insists that the value of the team is at least $170 million, and no one is wiling to pay anything like that. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/potential-owner-runs-out-of-patience-with-phoenix-coyotes/article2078048/ I can't figure out why the league is so desperate to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix. Why anyone with the resources to buy a team would want any part of this situation is beyond me, especially when the price is so much higher than it should be. There a couple of Canadian cities in a position to support an NHL team (including putting a second team in Toronto) so why not let the chips fall where they may. I still hold out hope that one day Portland will land a franchise, but that seems less likely by the day. Even though they don't have an NHL-ready arena in Seattle, the league would love to have a team there to create a natural geographic rivalry with Vancouver. Whatever happens, the league better have it figured out by the time realignment arrives two seasons from now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.