<p>Yeah, NRE, he goes down with his glove on top of his pad. It’s a huge target area. The Bruins are a great team. He has got to get his glove hand up.</p>
<p>It was interesting to see how the teams have figured out each goalie’s weak spot. Rask can’t do a thing above his shoulder on the stick side and Crawford might as well have his glove tied to his leg.</p>
<p>Pretty good teams to be able to find such small areas so consistently.</p>
<p>In the last round, Chicago shot to Jonathan Quick’s stick side and 5 hole because his glove hand is extraordinary. That said, the scoring shots were terrific attempts. The shot by Boychuk, for example, was more a case of a terrific shot from close-in than a glove miss. I’d say Crawford should have been more in position to that side, that he was slow moving into a better position to cut down the target, more than that his glove was off on that one. I’d say something similar with the game winner; it was a really well placed shot with a lot of speed. Rask could have changed the angle some more. </p>
<p>What I saw for both teams is they were making shots with more focus rather than being tense and missing the target or not seeing the target. When you’re mentally tight, you don’t score. When you’re mentally in the zone, you see what you need to do. Many of those shots were the kind I’d expect a really good team to make … but they weren’t before. That is, to me, a mental shift and I think a lot of what happened last night and in many games is the teams take their mental cues from each other.</p>
<p>BTW, if you go through the playing times, it’s interesting the Bruins played their 3rd line less after its success in the prior games. Both teams played their top line the most, almost for the same minutes. Chicago played 5 defensemen but split playing time more evenly while Boston played 6 but the 3rd pair much less (Krug and McQuaid). </p>
<p>I wonder why the coaches don’t play the 3rd line more. The Bruins 3rd line skates really well while the Blackhawks 3rd line has some real pests on it. Is it coaching the safest way by putting out the “best” guys the most?</p>
<p>Boston’s 3rd line had a great chance and that was perhaps the one miss - by Kelly, I think - which I’d fault. He had a wide open net and a decent pass but couldn’t get the stick on the puck cleanly, mi**** and the next attempt of course was wider because the puck was still moving and it hit the outside of the post.</p>
<p>Well, I got up to follow the last period on line. Yay Hawks! 5AM, going back to bed.</p>
<p>Bah. >.<</p>
<p>Pretty exciting game. Sorry to see Bergeron and Toews hurt, though.</p>
<p>The fourth line dominated the 3rd period. I love when the fourth line plays strong like that. It’s one of the best things about the Hawks.</p>
<p>Can’t say enough about what a great Cup this has been so far. Sorry to hear Bergeron left in an ambulance. Hope Toews does not have a concussion from that hit he took to the neck. </p>
<p>Anyway, back to Boston.</p>
<p>I didn’t see what happened to Bergeron. Was that at the end of the first period?</p>
<p>I sure hope that Toews doesn’t have a concussion. I hate it when players go after the stars like that. It was definitely a head shot by Boychuk and we were all surprised that no penalty was called.</p>
<p>They’re reviewing it. He’ll get a suspension. Doing that kind of thing is dangerous and a career killer (look at Crosby), and if the NHL doesn’t start to protect it’s players in those cases they are going to wind up on the wrong end of a law suit. Also, one of these days, a player is going to go to jail for this. Going for the neck like that is sick stuff. I’m not opposed to the occasional fight in the corner, but this intentional head stuff has to end. I didn’t see what happened with Bergeron. I feel horrible he left in an ambulance.</p>
<p>Today’s Boston Globe has front page a piece by Dan Shaughnessy which of course tries to argue that this series is the best ever. Why? Because if the Bruins lose, then it will be in the best series ever. What a pile of ego-centric nonsense.</p>
<p>I don’t know what will happen with Boychuk but that kind of blindside takedown is frowned on. Given the next game is elimination possibility, I doubt he’ll be suspended now.</p>
<p>The way Patrice was holding himself upright and then bending over on the bench in pain made me think he had some sort of internal injury. Not a groin because his legs were moving equally. Not his head, thank heaven because he really can’t take another big concussion. The most often injured internal organ is the spleen, I think, but I say that because I know skiers who’ve had that injury from falls. Beats me.</p>
<p>What do you think the best cup series is? They aren’t only saying that in Boston or Chicago.</p>
<p>This is a good series. Why? Because we’re in the middle of it and it has involved OT games. One game involved good pace and good chances that were taken advantage of. This last game involved decent pace and good chances. The first games not so much; it was more the difficulty of scoring that made the games tense. </p>
<p>Best? Why ask the question? It’s meaningless. And I’d bet on a stack of bibles that if Boston weren’t in this, people here wouldn’t be paying attention and would never bring this series up in a listing of best ever. To reach that, the Bruins either have to be in it or it has to involve a dynasty or something else spectacular. </p>
<p>My feeling is that if you’re a Tampa fan, to pick a team with few fans, the best series is the one the Lightning won. As a Detroit fan, I preferred the win over Carolina because that beat down capped a dominant year. But as a hockey fan, when Pittsburgh came back and shoved it down the Wings’ throats to win, that was a great series too. </p>
<p>One of my favorites was Montreal-Chicago back in the Beliveau days. Or the first Ken Dryden win for Montreal. That was an amazing series. People forget that pretty much every Cup game has end to end action and lots of tension. I can’t distinguish this series as being actually better, unless you want to label not being able to score - partly defense, partly bad execution, partly changes in the game (including equipment) that make it harder to score - as the be all of hockey. I don’t. I think the game continues.</p>
<p>It’s like the Patrice Bergeron is the “best all-around player” argument. He’s very good. He’s one of the best. So is Jonathan Toews, who is both a terrific defender and the core of Chicago’s offense for the entire season. Pavel Datsyuk - who won the Selke 3x in a row and outscores Bergeron. Henrik Zetterberg. Ryan Kessler. I can name a bunch. Is Bergeron in that group? Yes. But to argue he’s the best is silly. </p>
<p>I’d say the same thing when people talk about LeBron James. One of the cable channels has been running the clinching games of old series. I saw Magic and Kareem lose to Moses Malone, Dr. J, Andrew Toney and Mo Cheeks. The 3 point line has made players better distance shooters so you can’t compare but Magic was the better playmaker, passer, rebounder and about the same as a defender. Kareem, getting old and fighting with the giant force that was Moses Malone, was a different player but not worse, not even at that age. Moses had like 25 points and 25 rebounds. And this was after he’d carried Houston to titles nearly on his own. He was better, bluntly better. Like all fans, I’d love to see LeBron and Kobe et al dumped into games with Michael and Larry and Russell and Wilt but that can’t happen. Right now, with the decline and now injury of Kobe, LeBron is the best. When people want to say more than that, they are, to me, trying to make this time more special for themselves. </p>
<p>As for the best series, there is no actual discussion. The only truly great series was the 1972 Canada-USSR series - called the Summit Series. The absolute shock of the NHL, which was almost entirely Canadian then, to be crushed by the Soviets in Montreal. Then coming back in Moscow. Tretiak, Kharlamov, Yakushev, Maltsin. We’d never seen any of these guys play except in the Olympics. All Cup finals are good and some are great but every year there is one. There was only one 1972 USSR-Canada series.</p>
<p>Also, everybody better get off your lawn ! That’s for sure. ;)</p>
<p>I think the fact that there have already been 5 OT periods in 5 games is why people have been talking about this series as one of the greats. That’s almost adding two entire games to the series. With the exception of Game 3, every game has gone down to the last minute. </p>
<p>Why do you consider low scoring, defensive games as not that great? When the defenses playing a phenomenal game, it’s just as good as the offense scoring a lot. Either way, they’re good hockey. Games 1 and 2 were very good, entertaining games. That’s why this series is getting the recognition it’s getting from every NHL analyst.</p>
<p>lergnom, I agree with you about the Summit Series. I don’t think any series will ever be able to compete with that one. It would be difficult to do so, given the nature of the tournament and the history involved. I was in college at the time and remember huge get-togethers to watch the games. They were exhilarating and exhausting and we certainly needed the two week break between the games here and the ones in Moscow.</p>
<p>Some memories of that series, other than seeing so many terrific players on both teams: the initial shock of how good the Russians were; the play of Tretiak; the Canadian fans who had gone to Moscow singing O Canada at the end of the first game there; Bobby Clarke’s vicious slash on Kharlamov; Henderson’s goal; all of the crazy controversies. I went with a group of friends to the big celebration of the team’s arrival back in Toronto. There were more than 100,000 people there and it’s one of my fondest hockey memories (well, Crosby’s winning goal in Vancouver at the Olympics is close ;)). The saddest thing about that series was that Bobby Orr didn’t get to play.</p>
<p>In 1972 I was 4 years old. My favorite food was Mac and cheese. My dad listened to the hawks on the radio and the local leagues were still on outdoor ice at the village green.</p>
<p>Oh, poetgrl, you’re a young’un. 
</p>
<p>In other news, the Leafs won the battle for Kings’ goalie Jonathan Bernier this morning. I imagine Flyers’s fans are cursing Paul Holmgren, once again.</p>
<p>No suspension or further discipline for Boychuk.</p>
<p>No word either on what the injuries are to Bergeron and Toews.</p>
<p>poetgrl, you are really young. I graduated from hs in 1972. Had bill Wurtz been a nicer fellow, you would have been able to watch the games w/your dad. My entire family, all 12 of us listened together.</p>
<p>Hooray for Rockie!</p>
<p>There’s a huge difference, a gulf, between saying “one of the best” and arguing that it’s “the best”. Any good Cup series can belong as “one of the best” but trying to claim “best” to give your team and your city a special aura is crap. That was my objection. </p>
<p>Two points. First, I don’t think the quality of play has been sterling or spectacular. It’s been hard fought and much of that has come because the NHL has largely stopped calling basic slow down penalties like interference, holding and hooking. In the regular season, if the forward dumps the puck and tries to go around the defenseman and the defender steps directly in front of the guy and even puts his hands on him that is called interference. Not in this series. You see players being cross-checked constantly, even being driven to the ice right in front of the goal while a play is occurring. Never called in this series. So the play is, to me, kind of a mess. The OT’s are mostly a result of that. And btw, I think playing cleaner might actually favor the Bruins because they have more quality forwards overall and their defense makes fewer mistakes. </p>
<p>Second, I think I must have seen a reference to spleen about Patrice and not realized it when I posted because now I see it all over. I have trouble believing I came up with that on my own.</p>