Why this series is far from over
As we are all painfully aware, the Canucks have been embarrassed in the past two games of this series. Outscored 12-1 combined in Games 3 and 4, Luongo getting pulled, an obscene number of penalties and far, far too much going on between the whistles. A series that 4 days ago seemed to have everything going the Canucks' way has quite suddenly become one that, according to the mainstream media, is all but over despite being tied 2 apiece. Admittedly, the Canucks are certainly not in great shape - they were beaten in every facet of the game for the past 120 minutes of hockey - but rest assured, this series is far from over.
The mainstream media, with all their impulsiveness and shortsightedness, seems dead set on believing the Canucks lost Games 3 and 4 because, well, they suck and the Bruins are fantastic; and on top of that, that the Canucks don't stand a chance in Game 5 because the Bruins have all the momentum. And I think that couldn't be farther from the truth.
The Canucks didn't lose Games 3 and 4 in such embarrassing fashion because they are the inferior team - they absolutely are not - they lost because they were tired and unprepared. Justin Bourne, who while not the best writer still knows hockey better than most, wrote this morning that the Canucks simply looked gassed in Game 4, and I absolutely agree. They were uncharacteristically slow, made poor decisions with the puck, had a distinct lack of communication between players and were noticeably less physical than in Games 1 and 2. In fact, they played almost identically as in Games 4 and 5 against Chicago in the first round.
It's almost impossible to know why this is - maybe the players didn't get their sleep the night before, maybe they didn't take the games seriously being up in the series, maybe it was just a unfortunately bad couple of days for them. We can only speculate as to why this is. But there are positives to take away from this conclusion. Chief among them is that this tiredness is correctable, as we saw in Games 6 and 7 against Chicago; it's tough to know how the Canucks adjusted, but the fact remains they proved they could and did adjust. It also shows that it's not the opponent that is the problem, it is ourselves - meaning if we can fix our own issues, we are more than capable of beating this team, especially in a best-of-3 with 2 games at home.
Critics will point out that the momentum is now entirely in the Bruins favor, and therefore it will be near-impossible for the Canucks to win this series now because of it. I think that's a lazy narrative. Game-to-game momentum is a myth; there is a certain confidence that can be formed and carry from game to game, but it is certainly not the all-powerful force that it is made out to be. There is no statistical indication that game-to-game momentum exists, and we don't need to look any further than this year's playoffs to see it. For every indication it does exist, there is a counter-argument - the Blackhawks rallying from down 3-0 only to have the Canucks win Game 7, the Lightning coming back from down 3-1 to defeat the Penguins, the Bruins beating the Habs in 7 when starting the series 0-2 - the list goes on and on. To think that, with the series tied 2-2, the Bruins hold any advantage in momentum or are any closer to the Cup than the Canucks, in my opinion, is ridiculous. So long as the Canucks can recover from the tailspin they've been in the past 2 games - and I believe they will - this series is wide open.
There are many troubling facts from the first 4 games - the combined 3 points between the Sedins and Ryan Kesler, the lackadaisical defensive play from Alexander Edler and Christian Ehrhoff, the injury to Dan Hamhuis and suspension of Aaron Rome, the inconsistency of Roberto Luongo and the overall sluggishness of the team in the past 2 games. But the fact remains that this series is now simply a best-of-3, and that 2 wins - 120 minutes of the same solid hockey that got us to the Stanley Cup Finals in the first place - is all it takes for our boys in blue and green to hoist the Cup for the first time ever. We've spent 102 games defying the critics and proving our legitimacy - it's time to prove them wrong once and for all.
13 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well Vegas has the Canucks as the game favorite for game 5 as they were for games 1 and 2
So there.
Well at least I have 1995, 2000, and 2003. Those were fun.
by dees ees en drama on Jun 9, 2011 7:19 PM PDT reply actions
Ha
that’s something. Did they favor the Canucks for Games 3 and 4 though?
Bruins were slight favorites in both games
I don’t bet, but I follow betting odds out of curiosity. It’s amazing how often the bookies’ perception of the teams involved just doesn’t budge at all, or moves very little, on a game-to-game basis.
It’s even more fascinating, because you figure they know what they are talking about. If those people get it wrong, they’re unemployed.
Well at least I have 1995, 2000, and 2003. Those were fun.
by dees ees en drama on Jun 9, 2011 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions
By slight, I mean 5/6 odds.
And Vancouver was at 11/10.
Well at least I have 1995, 2000, and 2003. Those were fun.
by dees ees en drama on Jun 9, 2011 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Ah ok
yeah I like to check out the betting odds sometimes too. The guys set them not just on who they think is gonna win though, they take into consideration who they think the betters are gonna bet for and adjust the odds accordingly.
exactly
The misconception is bookies make odds based on who is going to win and while that’s a small part of it mostly odds are based on who they think people will bet on.
by Canuckelhead on Jun 10, 2011 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, but damned if I can make a better guess
Well at least I have 1995, 2000, and 2003. Those were fun.
by dees ees en drama on Jun 10, 2011 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it was Juice who said
that there’s no aggregate scoring. A loss is a loss no matter how crushing it is. We start over again in a best of 3 series and I think, despite what most fair-weather fans believe, we have the upper hand. The home town crowd will pump the hell out of the boys and we’ll take game 5. I really believe this is our year.
Going to church makes you a Christian just as much as standing in a garage makes you a car.
Speaking of dealing with fatigue
I wonder what went wrong, given this article:
well
the article is a little too praising of the sleep program the Canucks have going, but yeah, it’s interesting how this supposed optimal rest should be an advantage (and usually has been) but has failed them so terribly at times in these playoffs. I just hope they show up energized and prepared tomorrow – and I think they will.
not understanding the title of that article
does he mean the canucks are peaking at the right time as in this season, or peaking at the right time in these playoffs? it was written before game three and they went on to lose it.
it’s pretty fascinating how much the jet lag and travel issues were looked into, but i’m left wondering a lot more, such as if the canucks take mid day naps like most teams or if they do that differently. wish the article had a bit more information and less patting on the back of the sleep doctor.
first post on SB nation by the way >.>
2-2 is far from over
Its actually quite funny how the media has changed their tune after games 3 and 4. All I heard before the series was how Boston did not stand a chance against the Canucks and while being a Bruin fan I felt otherwise it was funny listening to them all making a 180 after 2 games and declaring the Bruins the team to beat. I have no doubt your boys will be putting forth a better effort tonight and I expect a much closer and tighter game then we have seen. Its so true that its only 1 game no matter how big or small the loss is each game starts 0-0. See ya on the ice tonight!!
For Horton!!

by 
















