Game 68: Habs/Lightning

If ever there was a time when our team needed to step up – it is now. We’ve seen the Lightning cruise into Montreal too many times before and take 2 points. There is no denying the effect that the city has on Lecavalier, St Louis, and Tanguay. It is as simple as this: Tampa trails us by 5 points in the standings with 3 games in hand. If Montreal is to have a chance at the post season, they not only have to win hockey games, but they have to beat the teams behind them when given the opportunity.

You HAVE to believe that we’ll see a steady dose of Jaro Halak to close out the season. Whether or not Price deserves the bum rap given how terribly the team plays in front of him is irrelevant. Halak gets it done right now – and unless he slips – he has to be the guy.

They’re all big games this season. Go Habs Go!!!

Related Bookmarks Tags

There are currently no tags for this post.

Leave a Comment

4 Comments

#1 Mats Naslund says:
March 9, 2010 at 10:58 am

There was one other thing that I wanted to comment on. Its the time of year to complain about the NHL’s moronic points structure.

The Habs have 32 wins for 70 points. The Bruins have 29 for 69. Where do the extra points come from? The Bruins have 5 more points than the Canadiens this year – earned by losing in overtime. It’ll never happen – but I pine for a day when the NHL awards 3 points for a victory in regulation, 2 for a win in extra time, 1 for a loss in overtime, and 0 for a loss in regulation. Gone would be the days when a team could lose itself into a playoff position. It would force teams to try to win in 60 minutes, and stop rewarding passive play with tied scores in the third period. Do it Bettman you little scumbag.

#2 Senet1 says:
March 9, 2010 at 8:15 pm

I always hate to see rule change in our game but we have messed up the game so bad in order to selling it to the americans that we might as well change the way we award points too. I understand what you are attempting to do and it does make sence, but someone did the math the other day and there were some changes but we ended up out of the playoff because we won some may OT games. Anyway one thing about this type of change you can always compare teams who have 150 points with the teams who had 105 and still decide who was the best team. It will encourage less OT games, but then again does the NHL really want that?

#3 Mats Naslund says:
March 10, 2010 at 10:37 am

I’m not advocating for the rule change because it would specifically benefit us – I want it because I feel that teams who get into playoff spots by virtue of losing in overtime is ridiculous. The Habs won again last night, giving them 72 points. Boston looses in OT (AGAIN) and has 70 points with 4 less wins than us. Thats unbelievable. They have 12 points this year (to our 6) for loosing in overtime. Last year we made the playoffs by virtue of OT points over Florida, even though they had more wins in regulation.

For me, the clincher is when you watch two teams in a playoff hunt stop attempting offense with 10 (or more) minutes in an overtime game. It reminds me of playing “Blades of Steel” with my brothers when we were kids. We’d let the time run out every game without scoring just so we could get to the shootout which was the best part of the game (other than fights). There is no denying that teams are more interested in gaining a guaranteed point by tying than pushing for a last minute goal. In a 3 point system, a win in regulation would be so valuable that getting to overtime would be a punishment.

Anyways, thats my rant. It wont happen so I’m not really looking to push it further. A great game by the Habs against a team they desperately needed to beat. I cant leave without commenting on Gomez, Gionta and Pouliot who are on absolute fire right now. Watch out league if we ever get two lines rolling at one time!

#4 Senet1 says:
March 11, 2010 at 12:06 am

Mats there is nothing wrong with your suggestion but the same thing use to happen before we broke ties with teams winning because they had more points due to more ties and fewer wins and loses. The only difference is now they get a point for a loss. Now they achieved a tie and have a chance for a win. Now sure but I think we have quite a few wins in OT. Your suggestion would make those wins worth 2 points and a regulation win worth 3 points. Lower place teams and defensive teams would play for the tie and chance to win 2 pts. Whereas high scoring teams would go for the win. It might open up the game, who knows unless it is tried. One thing for sure the better teams would have a wider spread in points from the lower teams that still make the playoffs. I do not think the NHL brass would go for it because they like the close races that this system creates, it is good for revenues, so I doubt if they would implement it.

Leave a Comment

ShoutBox

Last Message 17 hours, 10 minutes ago

Senet1 : Galchenyuk scores to back to back goals in shoot out to help USA win Bronze metal. I did not see the second goal but the first was a beauty.
Senet1 : So we could pick anywhere from 25th to 23rd depending on who wins these quarter final series.
Senet1 : First, is the 14 teams in the lottery. Then there are 12 teams that did not make the semi finals in the order of the seasonal finish, Then there are the four teams in the semi final the first two eliminated pick in the order of the regular season points total and the last two based on who wins and who loses the cup. So as it stand now if say Detroit beats Chicago then Detroit moves up to pick after us. Boston or NYR will move up and pick after us. LA or San Jose will move up and pick after us
Senet1 : Basically, I was wrong about the draft pick situation. There are three groups of drafting teams within the 30 teams.
Senet1 : seriously ready to challenge for the cup. He will us win games but he will not be the difference between winning the cup and not winning the cup. You pick up players like that once you have the team ready to challenge,.
Senet1 : I am looking at the players to draft and there are a lot of big 6'3-6'5 forwards available ion the draft this year. If we could draft 3-4 big young players in the 2nd and 3rd round why would you want to give that up for a roster player who may have 2-3 years at best. If we are going to build a winner to have to build it with bigger players and there are a lot of good big players available this year. So you sign Ott and he is with us for the short run, but probably not when we are seriously re
Senet1 : Boullion is a great mentor for the young D-men
muller93 : Boullion is one of MBs great additions--Boull ion is a definite Keeper.
muller93 : Getting rid of Kaberle frees up a lot of cash. Boullion is small but is reliable and doesn't back down from anyone.
muller93 : Exactly Goalie any thoughts on a punishing D-man?
goalie : They;re showing determination adn skill vs Ducks and Blackhawks.
goalie : REd Wings could turn out to be the surprise team of this year's playoffs!
goalie : WE need to rid our team of Kaberle and Webber. Step two would be to then move Diaz. If we get that big d-man I believe that would push Boullion to # 7 on the chart. We'd then go with Georges, PK,Markov (to continue mentoring Ememlin) Tinordi as our starting six . THEN I'd be excited about our chances. We could then work on getting bigger forwards.
goalie : I too would gladly give up a 3rd round pick for Ott- the type of player we sadly lack. AND if we could get one more rugged, expeienced defenceman it would help immensely.
muller93 : Senet what you are saying makes sense but if we can get Ott for a 3rd round I'll take that all day.
muller93 : MB should be looking at a big D-man first, even though I like our blue line with the addition of Tinordi. We need that insurance just in case one gets injured. Also I'm a firm believer in starting with the goalie first then-defense-for wards-and we already have good goalie. We have all noticed when we have the lead Price is tough to beat.
Senet1 : So sometimes you have to sacrifice for one year or two to build that team in the draft. then add the finishing touches through FA and trades.
Senet1 : Muller, Detroit is another good example. They have been in the hunt every year with good well balanced teams yet only one or two cups to show for it. However, they have built a team that has a chance every years for the last 10+ years. That is what I think we have a chance to do this year with a good draft. It reminds me of the habs teams of the mid 80 and 90's we built a team then with sold draft picks and won the cup twice during that time period. So sometimes you have to sacrifice a one
muller93 : Very true Senet, you do need luck and we haven't had any luck it seems since the habs moved to the Bell Center. We had an incredible run in 2010 with some crazy goal tending from Halak. With Galchenyuk-Tinor di-Gallagher all in 1 year--not too bad, even with an early exit in the playoffs.
Senet1 : Muller I guess we all have our own ideas, but there has never been too many times that were successful when they traded their draft picks away. We have a chance to build this team so we have a shot at winning the cup over the next 10 years. Even as good as Pittsburgh has been they have only won the cup once since Crosby and Malkin have been with the team. That is because you not only need great players but you need luck to win, but one thing about Pittsburgh they have a chance every year. The
muller93 : Good point on Torres, he might be a liability. Torres has to tone it down a bit, but that's his game-very aggressive.
goalie : Though I don't condone what Raffi Torres did - thos shows you how repeat offenders or near offenders are going to be treated. His hit was NOT illegal BUT what the rap sheet adn reputation Torres has he got severly punished. Lesson to be learned by OTHER players because Torres dopesn't learn fromk his mistakes.
muller93 : Senet normally I would agree with you on not trading draft picks but we are not in a rebuilding stage. Sometimes draft picks can be a roll of the dice and it can take up to 3 years to be NHL ready. We have a good team and I agree with Stuo players like Clowe-Torres-Ott -Scott will make a big difference. Somebody has to protect Gallagher, he can't keep getting hit the way does--we need a tough forward so they think twice before going after Gallagher.
Senet1 : Really a heathly Habs team would probably win more games against the Pens that we did against the Sens. Reason they Pens would not play as physical against us as against the Sens. If we get good goaltending we win at least two games.
zpezada4ok : hello all «link»
stuo11 : hes a tougher big guy too! Just a minor adjustment but will help a bit
stuo11 : hes better than markov, and hes french who was in mention for defenceman of the year
goalie : Markov for Beauchemin - an injury prone d-man for an ;old timer'd-man. Beauchemin is NOT what the Habs need in my opinion. He is a HUGE defensive liability.
goalie : Stuo 11 I'd make that trade with Oilers fast BUT I doubt the Oilers will make that. Two marginal d-men at the best for a switch of first round picks - not a chance .
stuo11 : markov for beachemin?
stuo11 : let moen go
stuo11 : maybe try and get steve begin back
stuo11 : we wouldve kicked out all other teams but pens, sens,
stuo11 : pens have alot of forwaRDS same with us but we have better goaltending
stuo11 : theres styles of play goalie. Sens played us good, but lost games to southeast teams florida and tampa and get crushed by leafs EVERYTIME. sens and leafsd cant beat bruins but we do frequently