Despite it taking seven games, Boston dominated in almost every head-to-head statistical category. With that said, a lot of the attention is on what Canucks didn’t do, rather than it being on the Bruins’ great play.
Patrick and I debate whether the Bruins won this series, or if the Canucks lost it.
Why the Bruins “won”
By Patrick Hoffman
Ever since the Boston Bruins won the Stanley Cup three days ago, many hockey fans and media have discussed, blogged and written that the Vancouver Canucks simply lost the Cup, which is just plain silly.
Rather, the Bruins flat out won and deserved to win the Cup for many different reasons. The three reasons that come to mind are scoring, playing physical and better goaltending.
When looking at the scoring in this series, the Bruins outscored the Canucks 23-8 in the series. Yes, you read that right. The Boston Bruins outscored and shutdown the highest scoring team in the National Hockey League.
In three games at TD Garden, the Bruins scored 17 goals in comparison to the Canucks’ 3 goals. Looking at Games 6 and 7 combined, the Bruins outscored the Canucks 9-2. Simply put, the Bruins had the Canucks’ number in the scoring department.
Secondly, the Bruins dominated the series physically. Every time a Canucks player had the puck, he ended up getting hit hard. The Bruins even dominated in the scrums as both Henrik and Daniel Sedin allowed Bruins’ forward Brad Marchand to punch them without returning the favor.
Lastly, the Bruins’ dominated in goal thanks to the great play of Conn Smythe Winner Tim Thomas. Thomas was the most consistent Bruin during the series and was one of, if not the main reason why the Bruins captured their first Cup since 1972.
The same cannot be said of Canucks netminder Roberto Luongo. While he was pretty solid at home, was horrific in Boston and was pulled in both Games 4 and 6.
Let’s face it folks, the Bruins won the Cup fair and square. If not for their two heartbreaking losses in Games 1 and 2, it could have been a Bruins’ sweep.
Simply put, the Bruins were the better team when it mattered most.
---
Why the Canucks “lost”
By Ryan Porth
While a lot of the credit should go to Tim Thomas and the Bruins for winning the Cup, the Canucks blew their chance at claiming their first ever title. Let’s start with the things they did unnecessarily to ignite the Bruins emotionally.
Aaron Rome didn’t need to step into an unexpecting Nathan Horton in Game 3. But he did. Rome was suspended four games, while Horton was also done for the series with a severe concussion. It was a late, dirty, unnecessary hit that ignited the Bruins emotionally. In the next five periods, the B’s out-scored Vancouver 12-1 to tie the series.
Roberto Luongo didn’t need to take a shot across the bow at Thomas after Game 5. But he did. Luongo mentioned that he would have stopped Max Lapierre’s third period game-winning goal on Thomas. Though the Bruins didn’t publicly take exception to the comment, Luongo probably shouldn’t have gone out of his way to give Thomas more motivation than he needed in two elimination games.
The other shenanigans – i.e. diving, embellishing and biting – seemed to bother the Bruins as well. As Patrick notied; when Brad Marchand repeatedly punched Daniel Sedin in Game 6, no one came to Daniel’s offense as the Hart nominee simultaneously argued to the referee.
It also didn’t help the Canucks that they scored just eight times in seven games. Thomas definitely had something to do with it, but the Canucks forwards didn’t seem to challenge him enough. Also, the power play was nonexistent and surrendered a trio of shorthanded goals.
And then there’s Luongo’s play on the ice. In the three games in Boston, he was awful, to say the least. With the Cup on the line in Games 6 and 7 he and his teammates buckled under pressure.
If it weren’t for Rome’s hit, Luongo’s mouth (and inconsistent netminding), the diving and biting, or the Canucks’ stagnant offense, this may/would have been a different series. (And that's that not even factoring in the countless injuries they played through.)
Instead, the Canucks went on to lose the Cup final, blowing their opportunity to close the door and raise the Cup.
Photo credit: Getty Images
Posts
8 comments:
Boston won pure.
porth u sound dumb first of all romes hit on horton was motivation but that happenes in hockey and with one of there top scorers out compared to a 4th line defenseman seemed almost planned luongo didnt need to motivate thomas he was already performing at the highest of levels had plenty of capability to shut down the canucks. never mind the bruins defense shut down the top scoring team in the nhl they had plenty of chances to score but thomas made saves that no other goalie would continuously. take away a minute from either home game in vancouver that the canucks won and there could be different outcome take away a minute in any boston win it doesnt matter boston dominated the series and at least 2 loses were heartbreakers games that could have gone either way and dont blame injuries the bruins didnt blame injuries last year after philly but it was a factor the canucks had plenty of talent and a deep roster to win the series regardless with possibly 2 hart trophy winners who were completely taken out of the series. Bruins won flat out and they flat out beat the canucks
Thomas was in the Canucks head....... it was plain to see by the time games 6 and 7 came around. All you have to do is look at some of the shot selection and pucks jumping over Canuck sticks to see they were rattled. Without Thomas the Canucks EASILY handle the Bruins, consider the Canucks badly outshot the Bruins in the series, especially in the first half of it. In the e3nd the Bruins deserve the credit for their cup but lets be honest here, without Thomas they don't make it out of the first round, let alone to a game 7 for the cup.
The beauty of it all for me was the fact that Boston finally showed everyone that Chicago had it right. The series similarities are unreal (except Chicago lost game 7). Vandyland has no heart, no character, no team spirit. Thank you Boston. Last year Chicago, now Boston. It doesn´t get any better. Enjoy summer - and hurry up 2011/2012 hockey.
To everyone who says we would not have won without Thomas playing the way he did. Isn't that what a goalie is supposed to do? Isn't that why they are paying Luongo so much money in Vancouver. How many teams have rode a hot goalie to success in the playoffs? Anyone remember Steve Penney?
Its good that Boston one of the original six won after 39 years had passed but I had to say
thank God its the last call this year with the Zebras ignoring Bostons to many men on the ice twice along with the free high sticking and slashing they got away with beacause it was enough to make Canucks fans puke,but to be fair I think there should have been a penalty on the Canuck that blind sided Chara
Mr. Porth - Your logic is lost on me. Although you state that the Canucks "lost" the series, you point out that it was all in how Boston reacted to certain events such as the Rome hit and Luongo's mouth. That is still Boston winning.
However, if you were to point out that Vancouver stopped looking like a team and more like a collection of talent that seemed to fall apart as the series went on, you would be correct with both the statement and assessment.
My belief is that both arguements are true. Boston played well enough to beat any team in the league in a seven game series. Vancouver seemed to get more frustrated as the series went on. They probably lost confidence in their goalie and were playing tentatively.
Aside from that, they did stop playing like a team (how many short handed goals were there?). I personally beleive that they didn't all buy into the diving, biting, and taunting. Simply put, they have enough talent to win on talent alone and didn't need to play that way. When the refs got fed up and the calls didn't go their way, it became a reason to lose.
If I were on that team, I would have wanted to win the Cup...for myself. Not for Luongo and his mouth after allowing 12 goals in less than 2 games, not for Lapierre and his taunting, not for Burrows and his biting. For myself
...and that is why I do believe that both arguements are correct.
Porth - in comparison to Hoffman's explanation (and entriely on the own merits of your comment), you sound like a hockey idiot. You are strecthing as far as you can the possibility that the Canucks lost the Cup instead of the Bruins winning it. I watched all seven games, and where it counted the most, on the ice, Boston simply outplayed Vancouver in all aspects of the game. The truth is Vancouver stole a few games at home - the series never deserved to go 7.
Post a Comment