TopShelfGloveSide
Registered User
- Dec 10, 2018
- 18,263
- 24,983
What's more nuts that this club went 19-3 or that the same club started like 5-1319-3 is nuts.
Yeah, I can't believe anybody had any issue with the 1 & only goal Montreal scored.Certified goalie expert here.
Freaking Jack just about blew out my eardrums!From around the 25 second mark, you get an 18 second offensive zone skating clinic from McLeod. Three important touches of the puck, where time away from the puck was involved reading the play and going to the right place.
p.s. As soon as you click play, click mute.
Steve Dangle.Who's the angry leafs fan that has a YouTube channel. He was on Sportsnet for a bit.
Can't wait to see his temper tantrum
It's unfortunate that one wasn't a RD. Not to necessarily always play together, but it would be a nice pairing to throw out there when the going gets toughI know Nurse gets alot of shit due to his big contract.. but being able to throw him and then Ekholm out there in a different pairing really allows this team to have one great steady dman out there for more than half the game. Toronto is sorely lacking a dman like Nurse/Ekholm on their team.
K this comment is getting likes, but what is the answer lol.What's more nuts that this club went 19-3 or that the same club started like 5-13
Steve Dangle.
Did you seriously just suggest changing the lineup, for no real reason other than you want a change, to a coach & team on an 11 game win streak?RNH - McDavid - Hyman
McLeod - Drai - Foegele
Kane - Holloway - Brown
Janmark - Ryan - Gagner
Might be worth a shot.
Hahaha yes!Lol this dude sounds like Charlie in Always Sunny in Philadelphia when he starts yelling.
Hoping for at least 13 just because the next 2 games against Seattle and Calgary are important to gain seperation even though we have 4 games in hand on both. And having the streak end to the Flames would just suck.It'd be really nice if we could push the streak to 16, if only for the symbolic nature of that being what it would take to run the playoffs.
I guess since the puck never left the zone they considered that the entry (I don't think you can tag up while in control of the puck). But I'm not certain on that.I know the offside rule, thanks.
Hyman tagged up after receiving the puck from Bouchard, then reentered the zone with possession when the puck remained in the Leafs' zone.
I haven't found clarity in the rules on why the Leafs were allowed to challenge that play.
Edit: or rather (as I supposed they're allowed to challenge any goal they please) why the refs focused on the first entry rather than the entry leading to the actual goal.
very f***ing bad and then very f***ing goodDoes anyone have Skinners save % before and after Knob?
.861 3.53 2-5-1very f***ing bad and then very f***ing good
Steve Dangle.
I feel that way about 90% of the shit that comes out of Ontarioi dont understand how anyone can listen to this
You said in an earlier post you know the offside rule but you obviously don't.Not sure why you're being snarky. Possession or lack thereof has implication on offsides in a number of different ways.
That circling of the rulebook does seem to answer my question, though. Thanks.
Usually they aren't checking as the video coach is the one that's doing it.Man Louie constantly saying Toronto was checking the iPads after each goal was getting on my nerves. No shit Sherlock, every coach should be checking every goal for interference/offside/see how the D broke down, it's their job.
Reading game situations is a strength of Knoblauchs for sure.Yep. Plus smart coaching, to send out your 2 fastest forwards and best FO/scorer/Drai for that face off against a tired D.
Never understood why NHL coaches don't do this more often. Like a guy like Todd Mclellan barely changes anything from game 1 to game 82 regardless of what is being thrown at him.Reading game situations is a strength of Knoblauchs for sure.
He makes these little tweaks at exactly the right time.
No, that is not at all what I'm saying and I'm not sure why it would be interpreted as such. I'm saying it was offside. Get the whole Bouch part of it out of your heads already ffs.You said in an earlier post you know the offside rule but you obviously don't.
He explained with the utmost clarity a couple posts ago but you seem to not understand for some unknown reason. He even posted a picture of Hyman with both feet clearly still in the zone with the puck actually touching his stick.
What is this possession or lack thereof referring to because Hyman had possession?
Are you trying to say that you think because Bouchard didn't gain full possession, but the puck just accidentally deflected back into the zone where Hyman touched it before clearing the zone, that it shouldn't be offside?
Not snarky, but a serious question.