Bob Long Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 24 minutes ago, Boudrias said: The win gives Van the home ice advantage back. JT and Petey had good nights in the circle but Lindholm struggled. Lindholm played a great d-side game. The whole team did. O-Reilly is the Preds o-zone driver and must have had nightmares last night as he had plenty of chances. Outside shots were a credit to the Canucks as chances in front were limited. O'Reilly was pitchforking DeCasey in one goal mouth sequence. If he had scored there would have been a challenge. Love Tocchet's coaching. Hughes was being hit early on and RT played him less and let his big boys step in. Zad and Meyers were very good. I am a little worried about Hronek's reads as he tried to clear the puck up the strong side a couple of times. Petey isn't shooting the puck. I don't see him shying away from physical play so probably a confidence issue more than a physical one. JT's no look pass to BB was one of the nicest plays of the season. The Preds had their chances. Game #4 will obviously be critical for them. While I can give them credit for their game last night, they could have easily won the game, I don't know how much they have left in the tank. On the other side the Canucks haven't scratched their capabilities in the ozone yet. Their 2 PP goals were a serious brake on Pred physical play. If Vancouver scores early in Game 4 they could end up popping a few. I think the physical beating we are giving them is having an effect. Even though they controlled a lot of zone time they got frustrated and took a couple of really dumb penalties. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 5 minutes ago, Jigsaw said: A lot of people are going on about only 12 shots, we were lucky to win….. The thing is, the shoe was on the other foot in game 2. We dominated and lost. So I figure it’s only right we return the favour. Exactly. And we dominated in game 2. They didn’t dominate last night. Barely any high danger chances and mostly shots from the outside. This team has shown all season they’re fine giving up shots from the outside. Not the first time we’ve been badly outshot and still won. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 16 minutes ago, stawns said: That will to win can be constructive, absolutely, if that person is in control of their emotions. I don't see that from JT, he is ruled by his emotions for better and for worse, imo I don't disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post HKSR Posted April 27 Popular Post Share Posted April 27 21 minutes ago, tas said: in an environment where winning is the bottom line, it's completely true. you think the avs are worried about nate mackinnon's "dark side"? 20 minutes ago, -dlc- said: Accepting losses as well.... A guy who hates to lose is more likely not to be complacent. You win with Millers. Guys that don't care if they win or lose would be absolutely atrocious teammates. They're the ones that show up when they feel like it. We know what kinda players those are. 3 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakrami Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 36 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: This is my point that Canuck fans are never satisfied. We get a win. But people are bitching we didn't win from lots of shots, or we didn't win convincingly enough. In the end the goal is 16 wins. Doesn't matter how ugly those wins are. There's no asterisks by any of the New Jersey Devils trap hockey Stanley Cup Champion seasons. We lost game 2 despite better play for the majority of the game. We won game 3 by turning the tables on the the Preds. Do people not understand simple hockey concepts? People thought we dominated Game 2. When in reality Nashville's gameplan changed to hang back and block shots after they got a 3-0 lead in the middle of the second period. The same thing happened in reverse for us in Game 3. We went up 2-0 in the second period, so our gameplan changed to hang back and box them out in our own zone. The number of shots do not tell the story in these games. Has it been so long since the playoffs that most fans do not understand how coaches try to win these games? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 1 minute ago, HKSR said: You win with Millers. Guys that don't care if they win or lose would be absolutely atrocious teammates. They're the ones that show up when they feel like it. We know what kinda players those are. The Miller emotion complaints are funny. When Mcbaby does it, oh that's leadership. When Miller does it, oh that's "toxic". 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 18 minutes ago, stawns said: That will to win can be constructive, absolutely, if that person is in control of their emotions. I don't see that from JT, he is ruled by his emotions for better and for worse, imo With the amount of certainty and conviction you always speak with and seemingly having an answer to every thing, I often wonder why you arent being paid for your opinions by a professional team 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 5 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Exactly. And we dominated in game 2. They didn’t dominate last night. Barely any high danger chances and mostly shots from the outside. This team has shown all season they’re fine giving up shots from the outside. Not the first time we’ve been badly outshot and still won. Not a bad strategy when you have your backup goalie starting. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post -dlc- Posted April 27 Popular Post Share Posted April 27 23 minutes ago, stawns said: That will to win can be constructive, absolutely, if that person is in control of their emotions. I don't see that from JT, he is ruled by his emotions for better and for worse, imo You don't see it. Thank God everyone who matters (his teammates, coaches) do. If he is ruled by his emotions and is this successful in the NHL, maybe he has more figured out than you do? Don't be so stuck on being right....it's actually really quite credible to be able to admit that maybe you had it wrong. With JT, you certainly do have it wrong. He's proven that. And it's just silly to consider him a liability of any sort....he's better much more than "he's worse". And ANY team would love to have him. Speaks volumes. 1 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 1 minute ago, Johnny said: With the amount of certainty and conviction you always speak with and seemingly having an answer to every thing, I often wonder why you arent being paid for your opinions by a professional team Doesn't it bother you that I have an opinion? That sounds like a you problem, not a me problem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldFaithfulcap Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 37 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: This is my point that Canuck fans are never satisfied. We get a win. But people are bitching we didn't win from lots of shots, or we didn't win convincingly enough. In the end the goal is 16 wins. Doesn't matter how ugly those wins are. There's no asterisks by any of the New Jersey Devils trap hockey Stanley Cup Champion seasons. We lost game 2 despite better play for the majority of the game. We won game 3 by turning the tables on the the Preds. Good teams adapt and win. I'd rather have some tough, low scoring wins than 6-0 blowouts as eventually you're going to run into a gritty block happy team like the preds so you have to find your way. Nashville is a well coached, gritty physical team which has scoring and can steal games. And you know what? So are we! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Googlie Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 Some Preds players reactions ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 2 minutes ago, -dlc- said: You don't see it. Thank God everyone who matters (his teammates, coaches) do. If he is ruled by his emotions and is this successful in the NHL, maybe he has more figured out than you do? No no Deb. His 43 years of amateur hockey experience trumps all of us. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldFaithfulcap Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 10 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Exactly. And we dominated in game 2. They didn’t dominate last night. Barely any high danger chances and mostly shots from the outside. This team has shown all season they’re fine giving up shots from the outside. Not the first time we’ve been badly outshot and still won. Like people forgot the whole PDO thing...i'm guessing we're the PDO playoff leaders by a mile. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 10 minutes ago, tas said: I viewed his prior actions as exasperation. have you ever been part of a group project where you feel like you're the only one, or one of the few who are pulling the rope? When I was in my later teens and playing high level hockey and baseball, I was a lot like Miller and my will to win just made my teammates miserable and play worse. The true road to success in a team sport is chemistry and cohesion. One player can't carry a team 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckMan Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 Everyone needs to focus on the series at hand and not on contracts. That’s an after playoff issue. I’m sure JR and PA are both looking closely to see who steps up and who steps down. They got us to this point and I trust their decisions. Nashville will come out hungry tomorrow. They know they dig themselves a deep hole if they lose tomorrow and head back to Vancouver down 3-1. Expect it to be another tough game. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 Just now, HKSR said: No no Deb. His 43 years of amateur hockey experience trumps all of us. It's so ridiculous to STILL be pushing a narrative that is somehow "anti" Miller. He's a beast and we're a much better team with him. This team would shrivel significantly if he wasn't here. Interesting that the changes the team has made (yes, including the coach) have pushed them to this level of success in such a short time. One that people saw as 3-4 years down the road. I just don't care how much amateur hockey someone's played...does not qualify them as experts. Or they'd be in the NHL themselves. I'm going to just give up that fight....I/we know what we have in JT. The others can keep trying to somehow validate an opinion from the past that's long been proven wrong. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 More gatekeeping by the "true fans". I'm a shocked. Also posters going after posters, and not the actual posts. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 3 minutes ago, OldFaithfulcap said: Good teams adapt and win. I'd rather have some tough, low scoring wins than 6-0 blowouts as eventually you're going to run into a gritty block happy team like the preds so you have to find your way. Nashville is a well coached, gritty physical team which has scoring and can steal games. And you know what? So are we! I agree, they played the game they needed to play to get the win. Again, my only issue is that it wore them down to the point they could only sustain it for about 52 mins They got lucky in that last 6-8 mins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 1 minute ago, stawns said: When I was in my later teens and playing high level hockey and baseball, I was a lot like Miller and my will to win just made my teammates miserable and play worse. The true road to success in a team sport is chemistry and cohesion. One player can't carry a team This is next level for me. "I was a lot like Miller" Not even close....this is not even worth pursuing any longer if this is the mindset. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 6 minutes ago, Gurn said: More gatekeeping by the "true fans". I'm a shocked. Also posters going after posters, and not the actual posts. Wait...so aren't you participating with this comment? You've added nothing about the players/team/game. We're going after the content and that's quite acceptable. No one's said "true fans". And if some cite their experience as qualifying their comments then it's ok to respond to that. Using the "true fans" is a deflection and just a really poor excuse to ignore what's being said. So what is your opinion on JT Miler and how he contributes to the success of the team? Or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 1 minute ago, Gurn said: More gatekeeping by the "true fans". I'm a shocked. Also posters going after posters, and not the actual posts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 1 minute ago, Gurn said: More gatekeeping by the "true fans". I'm a shocked. Also posters going after posters, and not the actual posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 (edited) 7 minutes ago, stawns said: When I was in my later teens and playing high level hockey and baseball, I was a lot like Miller and my will to win just made my teammates miserable and play worse. The true road to success in a team sport is chemistry and cohesion. One player can't carry a team You need a mixture of both types on a team (imho). "Rah rah" players & "even keel" players. Depending on the situation, one is required over the other. Again, imho. edit: I think Miller actually has been able to find the right mixture of both. Edited April 27 by NewbieCanuckFan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldFaithfulcap Posted April 27 Share Posted April 27 Just now, stawns said: I agree, they played the game they needed to play to get the win. Again, my only issue is that it wore them down to the point they could only sustain it for about 52 mins They got lucky in that last 6-8 mins. There was luck, almost the reverse of game 2 luck. There always is. It's not as lucky though when we spent most of the season doing it right? I screamed at the canucks early this season for doing it but they are really good at shutting it down this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.