Comments on: Game 81: Habs/Bruins

By: Senet1

Senet1 — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 00:11:02 +0000

I don’t think either Matts or I suggested that Gainey sat laraque to save him for the playoff. They sat him because if we need goals he is not going to get them. And know one has answered this question yet, who were you going to sit? We had Boston so shook up that they started taking penalties and allowed our PP to score. And as for being embrassed by being bullied I did not see us as getting bullied I saw a team that tried to bully us and found out that we will stand up to their tough stuff. The team played as a team for one of the few times this year when they had to. Had they played that way all season we would have been closer to the top.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 23:01:26 +0000

If it’s true that Gainey sat Laraque to save him for the playoffs, then that was one hell of a risky move because prior to the overtime loss, Montreal had not yet secured a playoff spot, and had they failed to earn that point, would be playing for their playoff lives tonight against one of the hottest teams in the league, which still has its eyes on fourth place and home ice advantage.

Risky indeed.

By: Donnie

Donnie — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 12:34:04 +0000

Well guys….I hope you are right and there was a method to Gainey’s madness. But as diehard Habs fans you all must know what I’m talking about…..watching your team get bullied and beat up while our tough guy sits in the press box….it’s just so frustrating, and kinda makes you slump back in your chair. When your team is in this situation, it takes away from the enjoyment of the game for you, it’s somehwta embarassing, and you are spitting for revenge when you know there is none coming…wow, what a way I was in the other night. I just hope you guys know where I am coming from.
I was hoping to avoid the B’s in the playoffs first round….now, I want the fawkers. GO HABS GO !!!

By: Senet1

Senet1 — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:33:24 +0000

There is another positive and that was d’Agostini, came out of his scoring slump. Two goals if he stays consistent and scores some goals he may be want we have been looking for, I still think it is only a matter of time before AK 46 scores, he seems to be working hard and even throwing his weight around, so maybe saturday night is his time. I would like to see us win because I think that Philly will beat NY putting us in 7th.

By: Senet1

Senet1 — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:25:29 +0000

Matts that is a good analogy of the situation, I just do not think that Gainey wanted to expose Laraque at this time just before the playoffs. I think in hind sight he made the correct coaching move. You can second guess the coach all the time but the fact of the matter is that we could have won this game with the lineup that Gainey put on the ice and without that lineup I doubt we would have even been in the game? Had we already made the playoffs, then maybe it would have been a different decision but because of a little bad luck and a couple of young players making a mistake we lost. I am wondering what the nay sayers would really say had we won?

By: Mats Naslund

Mats Naslund — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:12:42 +0000

I think Gainey played a hunch in that Boston has been winning games 2-1 in the last month and thus he should have his best offensive team out there. Yes it would have been great to have Laraque in last night, although I think Stewart may have been a little more effective. Weber had to play last night, so that really only leaves D’Agostini out (2 goals!). The hope is that Montreal beats Boston by playing Canadiens hockey. We saw that Boston can get caught trying to pound. If we use speed and determination we can beat that team. I would like to see Laraque-Thornton just to keep that goon honest..

By: Senet1

Senet1 — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 21:36:49 +0000

The two cards he is talking about could they be Laraque and Stewart?

By: Senet1

Senet1 — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:49:01 +0000

I am glad I wrote my recent comments regarding Laraque before I read this because it give credence to what I was thinking. Here is what Gainey says.

While others had offered up their prediction that Georges Laraque would be there to tame the bears at TD Banknorth Garden, the Habs’ head coach surprised many by not calling on his heavyweight. And don’t expect the mystery to be solved any time soon.

“If I tell you, everyone will know because you’ll publish it,” said Gainey. “I prefer keep a couple of cards in my hand.”

By: Senet1

Senet1 — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:39:40 +0000

WE saw a great game last night, and we say a team that did not give up. We saw Dandy playing a position that he has not played much all year and did a commendable job, yet he made a serious mistake. Maybe had he played defence more this year that mistake would not have been made, but the team is adjusting to playing without Markov and that adjustment is going to take time. I thought overall Dandy played a pretty good game, only wished he had not made that mistake, but I bet he won’t make it again in the playoffs. I thought Price played a decent game, could only be faulted on the one goal. This team for the first time all year showed character and they came together as teammates and yes Boston did have the upper hand on the rough stuff, but the important thing is we did not back down, with the exception of Obyrne? Now I wonder what Boston is thinking, we played them even steven took their best shots in their building without Laraque or Stewart, don’t you think they have a question mark in their minds now and are wondering just what this team will be like with those two guys in the lineup? Think about it. Did Gainey really make that big of a mistake, just maybe he planned it?

By: Senet1

Senet1 — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:25:53 +0000

We won more than a point!!!!!!!!!!!!