Post-Game Talk: Driedger leaves early with injury and Montembeault closes out a 4-3 nail-biter against the Kings

[Gentle Man]

Q has been rolling all lines and we will see if he keeps that going through the busiest month of February.
Boughner ran them into the ground which is understandable when we didn't have the depth we do now. I still don't think we've hit our peak yet but been consistent at racking up 6 in 5 lately. Just need a good 5-6 game win streak now.

Thankfully the trade Trocheck and Matheson chants have quieted down

 

[TheImpatientPanther]

Your anti-Tro crusade is overrrrrrr!

 

[vendetta]

I so much agree and I really don't get how this discussion keeps on going from people that claim to know the sport or to have played it themselves.

Did we ever hear a goalie say "I had a great easy game because I alone and by myself (!!!) managed to make every shot from the blue line visible to me"? They always credit the team with enabling the goalie to make saves by minimizing the traffic in front. High chance is that whether a goalie is elite or average, he will stop a shot he can see from far out. So it is a team effort, everybody is accountable.

Naturally, a big goalie has an advantage when he doesn't see anything. He just drops down on his knees and makes himself big covering as much net as possible (as Driedger does with the classic butterfly style that is perfect for large goalies). A guy like Bob is at at a disadvantage just because he is one of the smaller goalies (and has the tendency to go into kind of a crouching position to be able to react better and faster - but when you can't see it, the fastest reaction time is not enough).

Rarely any goalie in the league has the kind of athleticism like Bob and he is able to make saves barely anybody else can. But he just looks as unlucky as any other goalie giving up goals through deflections and screens.

I still think that our style of defending by forcing the perimeter shots does not suit Bob's style and fits better with Driedger. So I get the critique Bob gets. The combination of our team composition and team defensive strategy should be critizised. Again, to blame him alone is just.... (having trouble finding a fitting word without swearing or insulting anybody)

This is exactly the point I’m making. Dreidger fits better with us right now. He can track the puck better thru traffic and his positioning is better. That’s why I’m more comfortable with him than bob. But bob shouldn’t be struggling to track the puck as much as he has. Tho he has shown slight improvement recently . Our goaltending is starting to revert back to average which is good. Tho what’s the alternative to bob? Should we be allowing cross crease one timers from the slot cause bobs better at those? You can’t shut down everything and most goals we allow are from perimeter.

 

[vendetta]

It happens all the time to us.

No it doesn’t. That’s just not true. We’ve been pretty easily destroying teams. This narrative is just plain wrong

 

[Crossbar]

I so much agree and I really don't get how this discussion keeps on going from people that claim to know the sport or to have played it themselves.

Did we ever hear a goalie say "I had a great easy game because I alone and by myself (!!!) managed to make every shot from the blue line visible to me"? They always credit the team with enabling the goalie to make saves by minimizing the traffic in front. High chance is that whether a goalie is elite or average, he will stop a shot he can see from far out. So it is a team effort, everybody is accountable.

Naturally, a big goalie has an advantage when he doesn't see anything. He just drops down on his knees and makes himself big covering as much net as possible (as Driedger does with the classic butterfly style that is perfect for large goalies). A guy like Bob is at at a disadvantage just because he is one of the smaller goalies (and has the tendency to go into kind of a crouching position to be able to react better and faster - but when you can't see it, the fastest reaction time is not enough).

Rarely any goalie in the league has the kind of athleticism like Bob and he is able to make saves barely anybody else can. But he just looks as unlucky as any other goalie giving up goals through deflections and screens.

I still think that our style of defending by forcing the perimeter shots does not suit Bob's style and fits better with Driedger. So I get the critique Bob gets. The combination of our team composition and team defensive strategy should be critizised. Again, to blame him alone is just.... (having trouble finding a fitting word without swearing or insulting anybody)

Agreed.

What I would consider a bad goal completely on just the goalie alone is a unobstructed view, non-deflected and from the outside with the goalie having time to be set (not a one-timer like where Ovi/Stammer/Hoff tee up from) or a goal scored from a very bad angle like the goal Connolly scored on Hart:


This one I wouldn't consider all on the goalie alone, because he was in a vulnerable position/wasn't set and today's NHLer practices these trick shots all the time, just a matter of accuracy/luck

Anyway that's just my opinion.

 

[Gentle Man]

View attachment 309155

Your anti-Tro crusade is overrrrrrr!

 

[Jean Luc Discard]

View attachment 309155

Your anti-Tro crusade is overrrrrrr!

I think there's a bit left in the tank even though Troch has improved is game somewhat but it's still light years away from what it was on his 75pts campaign.

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

Have to just try to learn from that game and move on to the next one. Got the regulation win, that's the bottom line. I feel though, that they still will have a moment in the season when they click, and go on a run. So as long as they keep pace or pull a little ahead they should be good.

 

[TheImpatientPanther]

I think there's a bit left in the tank even though Troch has improved is game somewhat but it's still light years away from what it was on his 75pts campaign.

Think the Tro-saders were asking for more of a 2015-2016 Trocheck over the 2017-18 version. Not saying he's there yet but there are certain stats he's currently better at right now.



Faceoff%, CF% and FF% are better.
The silly turnovers have stopped and looks like his takeaways are on pace to beat 15-16. Now he hasn't started in the DZ as much though

More happy it looks like he's found some chemistry with Acciari. They create some chaos with their physical forechecking style.

 

[I am not exposed]

Superbowl? Maybe not.

But Q just got named as coach of the decade. So that game is going to have some sort of meaning and likely extra stuff for Q.

Joel Quenneville named Coach of the Decade

It will be a big ****ing game.

Surely the equivalent to the Superbowl would be the Stanley Cup final?Not denying it isn't a big game. Just seems hyperbolic to me when you're comparing the biggest prize in the NFL to playing a former coach.

 

[Gentle Man]

Surely the equivalent to the Superbowl would be the Stanley Cup final?Not denying it isn't a big game. Just seems hyperbolic to me when you're comparing the biggest prize in the NFL to playing a former coach.

Relative to the team's projection. Blackhawks arent going to the cup. Don't take it so literally.

 

[Dread Clawz]

Current WC teams are the Jackets and Carolina. If they both play for .400 for the rest of the season and finish with something like 85 pts....We would need 86 to make it? Is that what you are saying?

And if they both go hot and finish with 105 pts, we'd need 106 pts?

1 month ago Montreal was third in the Atlantic and we were 1 point behind. They went on two 8 games losing streak since. Why aren't we third in the Atlantic today? please explain me...

Because Toronto leapfrogged us. That's why we root for Toronto to lose. I don't really understand where you're coming from here...naturally we root against the teams that we are directly vying for position with. If they lose, it's better for us and it makes our road easier.

 

[I am not exposed]

Relative to the team's projection. Blackhawks arent going to the cup. Don't take it so literally.

Not taking it literally. Just seems like a silly comparison.

 

[sinDer]

Because Toronto leapfrogged us. That's why we root for Toronto to lose. I don't really understand where you're coming from here...naturally we root against the teams that we are directly vying for position with. If they lose, it's better for us and it makes our road easier.

It doesn't make pour road easier, and you just explained why yourslelf lol

Montreal losing 8 games in a row didn't make our road easier. We're still out of a playoffs spot. Toronto took their place in the standings and now we are rooting against them. Toronto losing their next 10 games won't make us move up in the standings. US winning games will do.

 

[Dread Clawz]

I think the point @sinDer is trying to make is that, more of less, the amount of points available doesn't change and therefore the general points needed for each position in the standings doesn't change much. Generally speaking, if one team wins, another loses. So they can't all lose and they can't all win. To make it into the playoffs in the 8th spot would generally take 95-97 points. So if we get 98 points we are guaranteed a spot. You COULD fuss about the difference between 95-97 points, but that's about it, which is why it's still too early to be scoreboard watching. Having said that, I like to see what other teams are up too as well, so I don't begrudge those watching the standings.

Well excuse us for being FANATICS, of our team. Isn't that the whole point of sports? Also, to say it didn't matter that Philly lost to Montreal last night, for example, is false. We are out of Montreal's reach, their results don't matter to us. Philly's do. I don't know how that can be disputed.

 

[Dread Clawz]

So you just proved my point.

Montreal going on a losing streak didn't help us because another team took their place.

Thank you.

And if Toronto lost one more game? We'd be ahead of them...I don't see your point, no.

 

[vendetta]

I think there's a bit left in the tank even though Troch has improved is game somewhat but it's still light years away from what it was on his 75pts campaign.

Nope
It isn’t. Only difference is he isn’t racking up po points. So wrong again.

 

[Jean Luc Discard]

Nope
It isn’t. Only difference is he isn’t racking up po points. So wrong again.

Yeah, like who needs goals, points 'n stuff. Just shut down the generator in your tipi and go to bed.

 

[Gentle Man]

Not taking it literally. Just seems like a silly comparison.

Which would be taking it literally.

As a parallel, everyone called the Knicks playing Dallas this year as their championship games as they were playing against Porzingis.

 

[GrumpyKelly]

Not taking it literally. Just seems like a silly comparison.

It's not if you don't take it so literally. lol

 

[GrumpyKelly]

Think the Tro-saders were asking for more of a 2015-2016 Trocheck over the 2017-18 version. Not saying he's there yet but there are certain stats he's currently better at right now.

View attachment 309167 View attachment 309169

Faceoff%, CF% and FF% are better.
The silly turnovers have stopped and looks like his takeaways are on pace to beat 15-16. Now he hasn't started in the DZ as much though

More happy it looks like he's found some chemistry with Acciari. They create some chaos with their physical forechecking style.

Tro looks lately pretty much the same old Tro except he's swapped offense a bit for defense. I don't think he'll reach 75 anymore playing like this but he can be a solid 60+ point player if he doesn't have a slow start like he did this year.

 

[sinDer]

And if Toronto lost one more game? We'd be ahead of them...I don't see your point, no.

yeah, we'd be ahead today. But it's pointless since the season is not over yet.

On the very short term, those games have impact on us. But not in the long term. Because like I said before, things even out and if a team lose, the other win.

The better proof of my point is that the 95-97 pts range to make the playoffs doesn't change from December to April. Teams move up and move down, teams go on losing and winning streaks. But at the end of the season, you need those 95-97 pts to make it.

Scoreboard watching becomes interesting with something like 10 left though. When the standing is pretty much set and you now only have 4 teams fighting for 2 playoffs spot.

 

[Prominence Problem]

Surely the equivalent to the Superbowl would be the Stanley Cup final?Not denying it isn't a big game. Just seems hyperbolic to me when you're comparing the biggest prize in the NFL to playing a former coach.

Chicago is not going to the Stanley Cup this year. All I meant by it, was this is probably the most important game in Chicago's season this year. Former players going against a former coach who brought them three Stanley Cups (Super Bowls.) It will be a sell-out game for sure. Also, it is always meaningful to DT when he returns to Chicago.

 

[Dread Clawz]

yeah, we'd be ahead today. But it's pointless since the season is not over yet.

On the very short term, those games have impact on us. But not in the long term. Because like I said before, things even out and if a team lose, the other win.

The better proof of my point is that the 95-97 pts range to make the playoffs doesn't change from December to April. Teams move up and move down, teams go on losing and winning streaks. But at the end of the season, you need those 95-97 pts to make it.

Scoreboard watching becomes interesting with something like 10 left though. When the standing is pretty much set and you now only have 4 teams fighting for 2 playoffs spot.

Yeah, and if one of those teams had lost a game in January to a western conference team or a basement dweller, instead of won that game, it would have a big impact. Every point counts. So again I don't understand. You're saying these points in January don't matter as far as the end result, but they do matter.

 

[Crossbar]

These mishandles of the puck would be other examples of where I would blame no one but the goalie:



This sequence was absolutely brilliant by Roy, up until he dropped it, that's all on him: Unlucky Bounce: Patrick Roy shows the world his glove minus puck