Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
caveman27

Boston Bruins vs St. Louis Blues

Who will win the Stanley Cup?  

13 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

On 6/7/2019 at 3:21 PM, flip12 said:

Acciari dove. It was a perfect no call.

Let's for a second say Accari dove, which is just horse shit, but let's say he did. Why wasn't he called for embellishment? If the refs didn't want to disrupt the outcome, call both the trip and a dive. Either way you slice it, the refs blew it....or didn't blow it, the whistle that is.

Edited by stick9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, stick9 said:

Let's for a second say Accari dove, which is just horse shit, but let's say he did. Why wasn't he called for embellishment? If the refs didn't want to disrupt the outcome, call both the trip and a dive. Either way you slice it, the refs blew it....or didn't blow it, the whistle that is.

I have too many questions about how NHL refereeing works to answer that. In the case of trip and embellishment, does that result in 5-on-5 or 4-on-4? Is it worth it to make that happen so late in a 1-0 SCF game late in a tied series?

If Acciari diving is horseshit, why did he look more like Pele than MacKinnon after Bozak made contact with him?

My conjecture is, the refs are trained to try and spot embellishment. Sometimes it results in a call, other times it doesn't. I've never seen embellishment called and nothing else, so maybe the operating mode is, 'if you spot embellishment but there was no other penalty, let them play on.' In that case, Acciari being down in his zone is no different than if he were because he got hit with a shot and couldn't get up.

I do agree that the refs didn't blow it, either the whistle or the call. I just can't believe Acciari legit Peleing from a half-speed Bozak bumping--not even kicking like Kadri did to MacKinnon--his knee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really doubt someone would bounce their head off the ice just to try to sell a call even in the Stanley Cup Finals. I would expect someone embellishing to through themselves back, but break their fall with their arms so that they don't hit their head on the ice. 

This is Marchand embellishing: 

and here's embellishment by Kessler:

With both of these dives you can see that the players go down easily, but not recklessly. They're not risking injury as it's a controlled dive where they brace themselves with at least one arm. Accari would have to have no regard for his own health and safety to go back that hard and land directly on his head. I'm saying this as a Habs fan who wants the Bruins to lose; the Bruins aren't angels (especially Marchand), but I'm not seeing the Accari play as a dive at all and while I don't ref anywhere near the NHL level, I do ref a lot of competitive hockey 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no question it was a bit of a flop, but there's also no question that there was absolutely a trip. Whether the officials either a) missed it b) chose to not call it is anybody's guess. In all reality, it really doesn't matter. It's pretty low down the list of missed or blown calls in this years playoffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All a matter of perspective. The Bruins had much better energy and did a good job of protecting and eliminating open ice. Once again, the team that played with more jump won the game. Game 7 will be interesting. Will the Bruins steamroll the Blues in the opening 10 or will the Blues play another great road game and spoil the party?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Blues hitting game is finally taking its toll on them (The Blues). The Blues looked tight and the Bruins beat them to just about every puck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, stick9 said:

The Blues hitting game is finally taking its toll on them (The Blues). The Blues looked tight and the Bruins beat them to just about every puck. 

Until things fell apart I thought the opposite, the Blues forced a ton of turnovers in the Ozone.  Rask kept that game where it was until Boston broke through.  Kind of opposite of Game 5.  Not sure of what happened after 3-0 so that may tell a different story, I went to bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, IPv6Freely said:

Horrible game. Hopefully they can bounce back but this has got to just be so deflating. 

Their power play was awful and they looked better 5-on-5 after the penalty was over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BenBreeg said:

Until things fell apart I thought the opposite, the Blues forced a ton of turnovers in the Ozone.  Rask kept that game where it was until Boston broke through.  Kind of opposite of Game 5.  Not sure of what happened after 3-0 so that may tell a different story, I went to bed.

I agree. The Blues looked at least equal or better until the 3-0 goal. The 1-0 was "whatever. keep doing what we're doing" going into intermission, the 2-0 was deflating just because it was a fluke bounce but they were still playing well. The 3-0 ended the game though. They were completely done at that point, and it showed. 

3 hours ago, chippa13 said:

All a matter of perspective. The Bruins had much better energy and did a good job of protecting and eliminating open ice. Once again, the team that played with more jump won the game. Game 7 will be interesting. Will the Bruins steamroll the Blues in the opening 10 or will the Blues play another great road game and spoil the party?

Even when the Blues kept the puck in the Boston end for extended periods of time, they never really had anything. The Bruins wingers were all over the defencemen. I actually recall mentioning to my wife about the massive difference in defensive zone play by both teams. When Boston was in the Blues end they had all kinds of time and space, but when the Blues were in the Bruins end they had none. So at that point how long the Blues spent in the offensive zone was kind of irrelevant if they didn't get anything quality out of it. And you know that's how it ALWAYS goes. A team presses, and presses, and PRESSES, and boom... they get scored on. Like clockwork.

I don't think the Blues have it in them to win game 7. This was a wasted opportunity and I think they're deflated. I think any time you lose a potential series-clinching game in game 6, the chances of you winning a game 7 seem slim. I'd love to see the numbers on that, actually. Though, analysts have been pretty adamant this year in particular that momentum game to game seems to not exist. So who knows. I hope they can do it, but I'm not expecting it to happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IPv6Freely said:

I don't think the Blues have it in them to win game 7. This was a wasted opportunity and I think they're deflated. I think any time you lose a potential series-clinching game in game 6, the chances of you winning a game 7 seem slim. I'd love to see the numbers on that, actually. Though, analysts have been pretty adamant this year in particular that momentum game to game seems to not exist. So who knows. I hope they can do it, but I'm not expecting it to happen. 

I agree and wouldn't put money on the Blues but honestly I have been surprised at how both teams have bounced back from losses so you never know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chippa13 said:

This is sounding a lot like what was being said after game 3. I wouldn't write-off the Blues at all.

I agree. You don't get to game 7 by accident. That said, this Bruins team has shown us they play their best hockey when their back is against the wall. Now you have Rask dialed back in and the top two lines are going. Anything is possible, but not looking good for STL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Game sevens generally fly in the face of statistics and convention. Statistically, it could go the Blues way; momentum-wise, it could go to the Bruins. It still is ANYONE’S game. I am not counting ANYONE out. Officiating could swing it. A bad bounce can swing it; ice is squirrelly this time of year. The Bruins play well with their back against the wall; the Blues tend to bounce back in commanding fashion after a loss.

So- it STILL is anyone’s game on Wednesday. Who shows up? We’ll see...

I am not going to pretend that I am not a Blues fan; I am PROUDLY a Blues fan since 1972-73. But this has been a super-weird season and playoffs. 

Whomever hoists the Cup at centre ice Wednesday (or dare I say early Thursday morning) will have earned it, blown calls and all. Only the Tour de France is tougher than the Stanley Cup, and not by much.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As history has shown, game 7 will probably be one of the loosest games in terms of penalties. I think they'll fall back on the standard of whether the action took away a scoring opportunity or created a scoring opportunity. Anything else, unless absolutely blatant or dangerous, will be play on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, chippa13 said:

As history has shown, game 7 will probably be one of the loosest games in terms of penalties. I think they'll fall back on the standard of whether the action took away a scoring opportunity or created a scoring opportunity. Anything else, unless absolutely blatant or dangerous, will be play on.

You’re right about loose penalty standards in game 7s in general. Which takes me back to goaltender interference in the Sabres/Stars series and Hull’s blade was in the crease on like the 2nd overtime...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, chippa13 said:

As history has shown, game 7 will probably be one of the loosest games in terms of penalties. I think they'll fall back on the standard of whether the action took away a scoring opportunity or created a scoring opportunity. Anything else, unless absolutely blatant or dangerous, will be play on.

Appreantly same crew as game 6. Not sure if that means anything but generally, they let the boys play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, stick9 said:

Appreantly same crew as game 6. Not sure if that means anything but generally, they let the boys play.

Never understood why that phrase is always seen as a positive...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see Backus in the line up for game 7. They could use his physicality, and moving someone like Heinen out I don't think would make a difference.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, IPv6Freely said:

Just please don't end on a goalie interference call... 

Don't worry, refs will make a bad call, or more likely, miss calls. They seem to be busy enjoying the game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Monty22 said:

I'd like to see Backus in the line up for game 7. They could use his physicality, and moving someone like Heinen out I don't think would make a difference.    

I like Heinen's game. He does a lot of the subtle things well. The only possible change I see would be inserting Grzelcyk if he gets cleared to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...