<p>The boychuck thing bugs me. I have to admit. Teams are always going for Toews’ head since he’s had concussions.</p>
<p>It’s really dirty, for one thing, but more importantly, it’s actually the kind of thing that shortens careers AND creates later problems in life. </p>
<p>I’m sorry to hear about the spleen, but am glad it’s not his head.</p>
<p>Oh, yeah, Gloworm. I’m glad we can see the home games now, but I have to admit it was great “back in the day” when Dad had to take us down if he wanted to see the game for himself. ;)</p>
<p>Strongly disagree that cleaner play favors the Bruins, and that they have better forwards. If Boston had better forwards they would be leading this series. They have a better goalie and defense. How would they be down in the series if they also had better forwards? There isn’t a better line in this series than Toews, Kane, and Bickell. I may be misunderstanding your meaning of “cleaner” play though. If you’re talking about not turning the puck over, then I say it would be about even. Both teams are making dumb plays in their zone. Boston’s problem is that they are going after the skater instead of the puck. Winning the hits stat isn’t going to win you games.</p>
<p>What I meant is similar to what you said. Chicago tends to turn the puck over much more. Not doing that in game 5 was absolutely huge. The Bruins are set up as a counterattack team that lives off turnovers. Chicago is more of a possession team. When the teams are scrambling in the corners and trying to hold it in, the difference goes away but you see it when they bring it up the ice. And by better forwards, I mean Boston has more depth, particularly when Kane is brought to the top line - which seems necessary each series. And the Boston forwards tend to be more well-rounded. I noted in a prior post that Patrick Sharp’s poor thinking while clearing directly caused a Boston goal. The Boston forwards make fewer of these mental mistakes. Everyone makes physical errors and every player loses battles. </p>
<p>That said, I think Boston’s defensemen aren’t as good as people want to believe. They lack puck carrying ability - and thus play a small rookie who has turned over the puck. They have some shooters but no real playmakers on defense. And they aren’t great skaters on the whole either. This was part of what Chicago meant when they talked about going at Chara. It’s not that you can push him around physically - you can’t - but that if you get into his body he’s not the quick skater who can then recover to get elsewhere in the play. Hit him, bump him, get into his space and that will tend to isolate him in that spot. This is generally true of their defense but of course it means you take a lot of punishment.</p>
<p>series is lacking the hate factor…I believe the players respect the other team and the fans don’t hate the other team. As a Bruins fan, I respect the Blackhawks…no floppers, complainers, ect(unlike Vancouver in 2011). If Chi wins, they are the better team(not by much, but will be better)…same if the Bruins win.</p>
<p>you don’t need puck carrying ability to be a good defensemen…and many who are may be good offensive defensemen, but that’s not a defensemen’s #1 priority. You need size and strength more so than speed.</p>
<p>The Bruins struggled a lot bringing out the puck all season. That is why they added Krug and the now not-played other guy whose name escapes me. (Bartkowski?)</p>
<p>You want your defense pair typically to have one who is more stay-at-home and the other who is better at play-making. These are fairly different skills you try to match. Chicago’s defense is more flexible, better offensively but not as good at stay-at-home skills. </p>
<p>Skating ability, though, is really important for defensemen. On that I disagree. They are on the ice the most so they need to be fluid. Their shifts are often 2 or 3x as long. They have to cover the entire defensive end, be able to skate backwards and forward well and be able to move deep into the offensive zone. Very importantly, they have to be able to leave the front or side of the net to go into the corner and get back or they have to chase a fast forward behind the net. </p>
<p>This is why, btw, I’m looking forward to the change for next year of making the nets shallower. Increasing the space behind the net puts more pressure on defensemen to skate well, gives more space to speed and forces forwards to come back further into their own zone. It might change the defensive calculus. Now you try to use your body to delay and hold the forward against the back boards but if he has the room back there to slide by you have to commit earlier to reach him, which opens up plays in front, or you have to let him go. If forwards come back, they can get trapped so might see more breakaways. </p>
<p>BTW, the best defenseman of this era has been Nik Lidstrom. Not particularly big. Strong of course but not excessively so. Fantastic skater who used his skill to control the puck and outmaneuver forwards. That extra skating ability gave him space on ice and helped him make plays. 7 Norris Trophies. Tied with Doug Harvey for 2nd behind Bobby Orr with 8. Over 1100 points and Lidstrom missed the big scoring era; his career began as the era of interference and slow down started.</p>
<p>Weird ending. A lot of just plain odd luck. The tying goal was a terrific play by Toews. I didn’t see who should have had Bickell or if it was just one of those things where the Bruins had to commit so many men to the fight on the boards. </p>
<p>But that winner. Puck comes to side, quick toss back to point, who winds up lets it fly as it reaches him, crosser lifts his leg and puts down his stick, deflecting it off the post as the other crosser comes out from behind the net to put the rebound back. Fault? Maybe Rask should have been back farther, but I couldn’t tell from the original shot angle if he was well positioned for that or not. That play happens many times a game but it rarely actually works. And that’s the series. A few inches to the side by the crosser and that shot goes harmlessly away. </p>
<p>I was worried about the Bruins for the same reason I was worried about the BHawks when they dominated by couldn’t get any daylight. One goal gives the other side hope. You can’t keep up that level of effort all game. So Chicago played a little better in the 2nd and managed to get that terrific play by Toews to even it.</p>