Game 1 - Bruins vs. Canes

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
6,196
What a finish. Bruins win and I have a couple of incredibly productive meetings.
 

IdiotKicker

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
10,783
Somerville, MA
Kase looked like a Krejci clone out there today in terms of generating space and time for himself. The two also seemed to have some ridiculous chemistry in the offensive zone, which hopefully they can build on. If that's for real, then there's something there that is very, very exciting for this run.
 

BruinsAreGood

New Member
Aug 9, 2020
85
Only problem with Kase is he seems to have a slower release and gets his shot blocked a lot, but this could be a Canes being good at shot blocking thing. Hope they keep building.
 

TheRealness

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
11,694
The Dirty Shire
Yeah, Kase has been a revelation. He is 10x the player he was when he first started skating, but the rumor then was he was still limited by his prior injury.

He's been great.

Ritchie... not his finest game, but Bjork was good.
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
4,459
Worcester
I am glad you puckers all saw what I thought I saw out of Kase. He seemed like a totally different person out there than what briefly saw pre lockdown.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,289
Excited for the return of Beast Coyle. One man wrecking crew. And the jawline comparison is simply unfair (and I should know, the men in my family have the Donato chin):

3327433275
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
Ironically enough, that was an all Massachusetts trade. Coyle from Weymouth, Donato from Boston or somewhere therein, and the conditional 4th was Cade Webber, who was born in Weston.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
of course he ignores if he wins the challenge there's no pp so there's no shorty so ... it's 1-1 instead of 2-2. Wheee.
Yep. He was basically asking the officials to tell him what to challenge and he is mad they didn’t and he may have chosen wrong (who knows how it goes if they challenge for GI).. He says he was never given a call on the ice. But he was- the call on the ice was a goal. They ruled it a goal so there was no GI or hand pass called on the ice. It’s up to the coaches to decide what infraction to challenge on.

View: https://twitter.com/scoutingtherefs/status/1293654239554744321?s=21
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,425
Only problem with Kase is he seems to have a slower release and gets his shot blocked a lot, but this could be a Canes being good at shot blocking thing. Hope they keep building.
Is the release slow or is he still just a little unsure of taking the shot? 1Ts, sure. But most of his shots are snap/wrist, so shouldnt be much of an issue.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,236
Yep. He was basically asking the officials to tell him what to challenge and he is mad they didn’t and he may have chosen wrong (who knows how it goes if they challenge for GI).. He says he was never given a call on the ice. But he was- the call on the ice was a goal. They ruled it a goal so there was no GI or hand pass called on the ice. It’s up to the coaches to decide what infraction to challenge on.

View: https://twitter.com/scoutingtherefs/status/1293654239554744321?s=21
That's what I told my friend in NC. Brindamour was whining about the ref "not giving him the call." But there was no "call," except "goal." The ref isn't obligated to give the coach a menue of all the possible ways they might have fucked up along the way. "Why do YOU think it shouldn't be a goal, Rod" is the question.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
That's what I told my friend in NC. Brindamour was whining about the ref "not giving him the call." But there was no "call," except "goal." The ref isn't obligated to give the coach a menue of all the possible ways they might have fucked up along the way. "Why do YOU think it shouldn't be a goal, Rod" is the question.
I’d have time for his argument if he said the whole sequence of a goal should be reviewable. All sorts of problems with that stance, but understandable. He made a bad choice and is upset the refs didn’t tell him what to do. He was never going to win a hand pass challenge because Mrazek played the puck. He may have won a GI challenge.
 

McDrew

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2006
4,060
Portland, OR
I still think they may have won a challenge that the puck should have been "frozen" when Mrazek's glove was over it. The motion to "flick" the puck towards Coyle was heavily encouraged by Bjork making an as-the-save-happens swipe at the puck that hit Mrazek's glove pretty clean.

View: https://youtu.be/byZ7c9rxkeE?t=123


Use comma and period to go frame by frame if its hard to see.
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,380
I still think they may have won a challenge that the puck should have been "frozen" when Mrazek's glove was over it. The motion to "flick" the puck towards Coyle was heavily encouraged by Bjork making an as-the-save-happens swipe at the puck that hit Mrazek's glove pretty clean.

View: https://youtu.be/byZ7c9rxkeE?t=123


Use comma and period to go frame by frame if its hard to see.
This is correct. The ref literally said in the review announcement that Mrazek had possession which negated the hand pass. It should have been blown dead and have been no goal, and if that had happened against the Bruins I’d be furious.

But when challenging for a hand pass, it was clear it wasn’t a hand pass, so that was the right call there.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I’d have time for his argument if he said the whole sequence of a goal should be reviewable. All sorts of problems with that stance, but understandable. He made a bad choice and is upset the refs didn’t tell him what to do. He was never going to win a hand pass challenge because Mrazek played the puck. He may have won a GI challenge.
I have a vague memory of that happening in the NFL, playoffs, I think. Where the coach tried to challenge something unreviewable and go t apnealty or lost a timeout or something. Then they had to change the rule. Or something.
 

McDrew

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2006
4,060
Portland, OR
The ref announced it as "missed stoppage of the puck" though, which is what made me think of the freeze under the glove in the first place. I think this literally might have been a coaching fuckup where he asked for a review for "any missed stoppage" and should have asked for a review for a "missed stoppage because the goalie covered the puck"
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
The ref announced it as "missed stoppage of the puck" though, which is what made me think of the freeze under the glove in the first place. I think this literally might have been a coaching fuckup where he asked for a review for "any missed stoppage" and should have asked for a review for a "missed stoppage because the goalie covered the puck"
I don't think a missed stoppage due to goalie covering the puck is reviewable, based on this:
This change will allow Challenges of plays that may involve pucks that hit the spectator netting, pucks that are high-sticked to a teammate in the offensive zone, pucks that have gone out of play but are subsequently touched in the offensive zone and hand passes that precede without a play stoppage and ultimately conclude in the scoring of a goal. Plays that entail "discretionary stoppages" (e.g. penalty calls) will not be subject to a Coach's Challenge.
The goalie "freezing" the puck would seem to be a "discretionary stoppage."
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,425
Is a frozen puck challengeable though or is that a (dreaded NFL term) judgement call?
This is my question as well.

Goalies have the ability to throw the puck out. Just because the goalie has his glove on the puck, does that make the whistle immediate?
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,380
Yep, if he challenges for goalie interference he wins the challenge.

But the refs don't owe him shit. It's a good goal. He's gotta pick what he's challenging and he doesn't seem to understand that.
 

McBride11

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
22,109
Durham, NC
I honestly don't know the rule, it looked like when he put his glove down he also covered Bjork's stick. IF he covered puck and Bjork's stick does that matter? Aka he cannot freeze it since the players stick is also there? Or it doesn't matter because Mrazek has the puck under the glove?
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
28,534
right here
Did he say possession or control? I’m thinking thier out is saying he had possession of it, thus negating the hand pass, but never fully froze (or controlled) it.
‘I may be making things up.
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,380
I honestly don't know the rule, it looked like when he put his glove down he also covered Bjork's stick. IF he covered puck and Bjork's stick does that matter? Aka he cannot freeze it since the players stick is also there? Or it doesn't matter because Mrazek has the puck under the glove?
it doesn't matter.
Did he say possession or control? I’m thinking thier out is saying he had possession of it, thus negating the hand pass, but never fully froze (or controlled) it.
‘I may be making things up.
Frankly to me they're the same. Possession = control.
 

Maximus

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
5,774
Kase looked like a Krejci clone out there today in terms of generating space and time for himself. The two also seemed to have some ridiculous chemistry in the offensive zone, which hopefully they can build on. If that's for real, then there's something there that is very, very exciting for this run.
Kase was a revelation for me too, we didn't see any of that post trade deadline when he was recovering from injury. Krejci's line may be very impactful for this run. Ritchie should sit for Kuhlman on Coyle's line at this point. He doesn't complement Coyle and Bjork or anyone for that matter at this point.
 

Cotillion

New Member
Jun 11, 2019
4,926
I think the puck covered falls under the goalie interference umbrella.
Yep, if he challenges for goalie interference he wins the challenge.

But the refs don't owe him shit. It's a good goal. He's gotta pick what he's challenging and he doesn't seem to understand that.
If that’s goalie interference than why does anyone poke at the puck under the goalie? It’ll always be goalie interference so you can’t gain anything by doing it.
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,380
If that’s goalie interference than why does anyone poke at the puck under the goalie? It’ll always be goalie interference so you can’t gain anything by doing it.
Except when they screw up and don't call it and it leads to a goal. Today is literally why they do it haha.

And it's not a penalty if they call it, just a disallowed goal. No reason not to try.
 

TheRealness

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
11,694
The Dirty Shire
Except when they screw up and don't call it and it leads to a goal. Today is literally why they do it haha.

And it's not a penalty if they call it, just a disallowed goal. No reason not to try.
As someone who has never gotten that call in his favor in his life, I have little sympathy for Mrazek and the Canes.