NHL 2011 PLAYOFFS

Break The Sky

MayDay10 wrote:

dont forget that Snider/Comcast just forked over Billions of dollars for the TV rights too.

Snider actually had the audacity to imply that he would have some sort of leverage in Richards not being suspended. I can't help but repeat myself on that one. If the NHL were a person, I believe the word we would call them when we talked in the locker room is whore. The NHL is in bed with way too many people that do not have the sports best interest in mind.

Johnny Abruzzo

Bump.

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Big Drop wrote:

4 games to win. I don't even think about celebrating until 5 minutes after the 4th win. I've seen too much happen in my life. After all, I've seen Philly beat us in a series because a goal that went through the side of the net counted.

I'm really curious what you're talking about. I'm pretty sure the last 3 times the Flyers beat the Sabres (1995, 1997, 2000) were in 5 convincing games. So it would be hard to blame a whole series on one goal when your team only won 1 game anyway. :?

Anything? I just want to know, because I thought all 3 of those series were pretty sound victories.

Johnny Abruzzo

Big Drop wrote:

MayDay10 wrote:

dont forget that Snider/Comcast just forked over Billions of dollars for the TV rights too.

Snider actually had the audacity to imply that he would have some sort of leverage in Richards not being suspended. I can't help but repeat myself on that one. If the NHL were a person, I believe the word we would call them when we talked in the locker room is whore. The NHL is in bed with way too many people that do not have the sports best interest in mind.

I'll tell you straight out that Snider doesn't give a shit about the NHL's interests. His two interests are: 1- Making Money, and 2- Flyers winning the Stanley Cup. He's good at the first one at least.

Break The Sky

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Bump.

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Big Drop wrote:

4 games to win. I don't even think about celebrating until 5 minutes after the 4th win. I've seen too much happen in my life. After all, I've seen Philly beat us in a series because a goal that went through the side of the net counted.

I'm really curious what you're talking about. I'm pretty sure the last 3 times the Flyers beat the Sabres (1995, 1997, 2000) were in 5 convincing games. So it would be hard to blame a whole series on one goal when your team only won 1 game anyway. :?

Anything? I just want to know, because I thought all 3 of those series were pretty sound victories.

The goal went through the side of the net and that's pretty well documented. I'm no prognosticator and I can't tell you if Buffalo would have turned it around had the goal not been counted. I guess saying Philly beat us because of the goal was a little brash.

lukin2006

fife wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I get why people on jumping on Luongo but what about the twins...how many times in that overtime did they come into the Chicago zone trying to make all the moves and the perfect pass...look at Chicago, they were just putting the puck to the net and going in after it. Chicago is playing playoff hockey...Vancouver is not.

Who else were we to use in goal in the Olympics? At 1 time goaltending was a strong point for Canada, not so much anymore...but I do see that starting to emerge again with Price and Fleury but they are no where near as good as Roy and Brodeur.

I agree that the twins are not playing well either but i don't think you can say that they are the reason that Vancouver is losing. the twins have always played that way. the reason the black hawks are throwing every thing at the net is because Lou is not playing well. he is being outplayed by Crawford who is a rookie.

as for the goalie situation in Canada, i actually think that we are getting better. I really like cam Ward, i really like price and also Fleury but your right they are not a Roy or Brodeur but they are 2 of the best goalies of all time and not easily replaced.

How many cups have the Vancouver won with the twins? They need to be grittier...especially in game 7 , look at Chicago, their superstars, Toews, Kane, Sharp are just far grittier, they'll go to the front of the net looking for those cheap goals, Chicago knows how to get it done, Vancouver has had enough time to figure out how to get it done.

I want the Canucks to win and I still think they can win, they just need to a lot more grittier and it don't matter who it is but somebody has to step up in game 7...maybe it will be LU.

We'll see in the 3 years how the goaltending situation is...yeah I forgot about Ward, as for the Olympics, it may not happen anyways...my only real problem with the selection of the olympic team is I'd rather see them go with youth oriented teams and leave the old timers home...how much better would our next olympic team be with an experienced Stamkos (and he was very worthy the last time) and Mike Green 9 (also very worthy and we could have used him on PP). I know people might not like to hear this but I thought Burke and Wilson did a better job building the team, and I thought Wilson was the better coach and the US might be the favourites in 3 years.

Gary Carter

lukin2006 wrote:

I know people might not like to hear this but I thought Burke and Wilson did a better job building the team, and I thought Wilson was the better coach and the US might be the favourites in 3 years.

i can't see the US ever being favorites in 3 years time. team canada is gonna be loaded the next 3 olympics or so.

polaris_x

ok ... i've watched that richards hit a few times now and my opinion is that it was a hockey play ... i don't think there was an intent to injure - just simply hit the guy to get the puck ... you can see him looking for the puck the whole time ... now, don't get me wrong - it's a penalty ... i just don't think it was dirty ...

hockey is a rough sport and they do need to do a better job of protecting players ... but these guys are faster and stronger now ... look at crosby ... arguably the league's best player hasn't played in months and i don't think any of the hits he took to get concussed were called penalties ...

Johnny Abruzzo

Big Drop wrote:

The goal went through the side of the net and that's pretty well documented. I'm no prognosticator and I can't tell you if Buffalo would have turned it around had the goal not been counted. I guess saying Philly beat us because of the goal was a little brash.

Funny, I had no idea when that happened. Googled and found it was 2000. Flyers won the series in 5, with Buffalo's only victory coming in OT in Game 4. That is domination.

The phantom goal came in Game 2, a 2-1 Flyers' victory. Considering the Sabres scored 8 goals in a 5 game series, it's a safe bet the Flyers would've come up with another goal to win that game before Buffalo got around to scoring. Sorry, it's not worth whining about this. Phila was just better that year.

Whining about Richards' hit is another story and Ed Snider being on the suspension committee is another story.

So, I found this Orange Boycott thing in my googling - I enjoyed it!

Flyers are one of 2 teams to defeat the Sabres in the Stanley Cup Finals, and I'm pretty sure they cheated. :? Now there's some solid journalism...
http://wnymedia.net/nickmendola-2/2011/04/orange-boycott-sabres-draw-flyers/

MFCarissa

lukin2006 wrote:

We'll see in the 3 years how the goaltending situation is...yeah I forgot about Ward, as for the Olympics, it may not happen anyways...my only real problem with the selection of the olympic team is I'd rather see them go with youth oriented teams and leave the old timers home...how much better would our next olympic team be with an experienced Stamkos (and he was very worthy the last time) and Mike Green 9 (also very worthy and we could have used him on PP). I know people might not like to hear this but I thought Burke and Wilson did a better job building the team, and I thought Wilson was the better coach and the US might be the favourites in 3 years.

I can definitely see why Mike Green was passed on last Olympics. He hasn't been committed to playing actual defense until this season. He used to basically be a 4th forward (and why would Team Canada need a D-man like that on a team stacked with forwards?), this year he has been making sacrifices and blocking shots. He was pretty brutal in the playoffs in the past too.

lukin2006

Big Drop wrote:

MayDay10 wrote:

dont forget that Snider/Comcast just forked over Billions of dollars for the TV rights too.

Snider actually had the audacity to imply that he would have some sort of leverage in Richards not being suspended. I can't help but repeat myself on that one. If the NHL were a person, I believe the word we would call them when we talked in the locker room is whore. The NHL is in bed with way too many people that do not have the sports best interest in mind.

or the players interest

lukin2006

MFCarissa wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

We'll see in the 3 years how the goaltending situation is...yeah I forgot about Ward, as for the Olympics, it may not happen anyways...my only real problem with the selection of the olympic team is I'd rather see them go with youth oriented teams and leave the old timers home...how much better would our next olympic team be with an experienced Stamkos (and he was very worthy the last time) and Mike Green 9 (also very worthy and we could have used him on PP). I know people might not like to hear this but I thought Burke and Wilson did a better job building the team, and I thought Wilson was the better coach and the US might be the favourites in 3 years.

I can definitely see why Mike Green was passed on last Olympics. He hasn't been committed to playing actual defense until this season. He used to basically be a 4th forward (and why would Team Canada need a D-man like that on a team stacked with forwards?), this year he has been making sacrifices and blocking shots. He was pretty brutal in the playoffs in the past too.

because one of the things needing improvement from Turin was the PP and he's was one of the to PP guys in the league. Their are always guy that get a lot less minutes, he could have been one of those guys. Remember we brought along Joe Thorton .

MFCarissa

lukin2006 wrote:

MFCarissa wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

We'll see in the 3 years how the goaltending situation is...yeah I forgot about Ward, as for the Olympics, it may not happen anyways...my only real problem with the selection of the olympic team is I'd rather see them go with youth oriented teams and leave the old timers home...how much better would our next olympic team be with an experienced Stamkos (and he was very worthy the last time) and Mike Green 9 (also very worthy and we could have used him on PP). I know people might not like to hear this but I thought Burke and Wilson did a better job building the team, and I thought Wilson was the better coach and the US might be the favourites in 3 years.

I can definitely see why Mike Green was passed on last Olympics. He hasn't been committed to playing actual defense until this season. He used to basically be a 4th forward (and why would Team Canada need a D-man like that on a team stacked with forwards?), this year he has been making sacrifices and blocking shots. He was pretty brutal in the playoffs in the past too.

because one of the things needing improvement from Turin was the PP and he's was one of the to PP guys in the league. Their are always guy that get a lot less minutes, he could have been one of those guys. Remember we brought along Joe Thorton .

Yeah, but on the Caps, Green's on the PP with a bunch of Russians and a Swede. The one thing I didn't understand was the St. Louis snub. And the Sharks line was a good idea in theory, but that particular line has made a habit of dropping their production in big games. I remember Pierre McGuire said during the Olympics, "This Sharks line is showing great chemistry early!" Oh really, Pierre. I wonder why that might be. :roll:

lukin2006

metsfan wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I know people might not like to hear this but I thought Burke and Wilson did a better job building the team, and I thought Wilson was the better coach and the US might be the favourites in 3 years.

i can't see the US ever being favorites in 3 years time. team canada is gonna be loaded the next 3 olympics or so.

I believe if you take a look at your roster you'll see that they'll have a good team...we had holes on our olympic team, goaltending and our inability to come together as team, we need to come together quicker, and if we add Jumbo Joe thats a big hole .

Gary Carter

lukin2006 wrote:

I believe if you take a look at your roster you'll see that they'll have a good team...we had holes on our olympic team, goaltending and our inability to come together as team, we need to come together quicker, and if we add Jumbo Joe thats a big hole .

i was looking at it more so of stamkos, JT, taylor hall and 1 or 2 other canadian youngsters being primmed for the olympics.

lukin2006

MFCarissa wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

MFCarissa wrote:

I can definitely see why Mike Green was passed on last Olympics. He hasn't been committed to playing actual defense until this season. He used to basically be a 4th forward (and why would Team Canada need a D-man like that on a team stacked with forwards?), this year he has been making sacrifices and blocking shots. He was pretty brutal in the playoffs in the past too.

because one of the things needing improvement from Turin was the PP and he's was one of the to PP guys in the league. Their are always guy that get a lot less minutes, he could have been one of those guys. Remember we brought along Joe Thorton .

Yeah, but on the Caps, Green's on the PP with a bunch of Russians and a Swede. The one thing I didn't understand was the St. Louis snub. And the Sharks line was a good idea in theory, but that particular line has made a habit of dropping their production in big games. I remember Pierre McGuire said during the Olympics, "This Sharks line is showing great chemistry early!" Oh really, Pierre. I wonder why that might be. :roll:

What's him playing with Russian and Swedes have anything to do with it? Where were they on the day of gold medal game? Green had 70+ points +39 that year and has been nominated for 2 norris trophy's...not bad for a 25 year old. St louis comes down to size I'm guessing. We like our forwards big and physical...some of the old school guys at hockey Canada probably still want ours teams to hit and hit and hit some more to wear the opponent out.

lukin2006

metsfan wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I believe if you take a look at your roster you'll see that they'll have a good team...we had holes on our olympic team, goaltending and our inability to come together as team, we need to come together quicker, and if we add Jumbo Joe thats a big hole .

i was looking at it more so of stamkos, JT, taylor hall and 1 or 2 other canadian youngsters being primmed for the olympics.

I see it from that perspective. I just don't assume that Hall some of the other young guns will be there. They left Crosby off in 2006, Stamkos and Green this past Olympics. I really like the idea of adding younger guys. If Crosby was there in 06 he would have been that much better in'10 if Stamkos and Green were there '10 they'd be even better in '14. The 1 area I think the US has an advantage is Wilson and Burke...the US played like a team from the get go and you were only 1 shot away from winning it. 2 players to look out for in '14 for you guys is Carlson and Fowler.

EZ1221C

Go Pens tonight! Finish off the Bolts!

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

ok ... i've watched that richards hit a few times now and my opinion is that it was a hockey play ... i don't think there was an intent to injure - just simply hit the guy to get the puck ... you can see him looking for the puck the whole time ... now, don't get me wrong - it's a penalty ... i just don't think it was dirty ...

hockey is a rough sport and they do need to do a better job of protecting players ... but these guys are faster and stronger now ... look at crosby ... arguably the league's best player hasn't played in months and i don't think any of the hits he took to get concussed were called penalties ...

I agree...you are right Crosby's hits were not called penalties. Pittsburgh should be an example to the league and all sports teams...he's been travelling with the team now, practicing and working several hours a day with personal trainer...so my guess is he can play...but I'm thinking they will not use him unless absolutely necessary.

So for them to hold him back this long and he may not play this year shows me that they are taking this concussion very serious and good for them.

On a side note, the Pittsburgh coach should win coach of the year hands down, without Malkin and Crosby they came within a whisker of winning the eastern conference.

MFCarissa

lukin2006 wrote:

What's him playing with Russian and Swedes have anything to do with it? Where were they on the day of gold medal game? Green had 70+ points +39 that year and has been nominated for 2 norris trophy's...not bad for a 25 year old. St louis comes down to size I'm. We like our forwards big and physical...some of the old school guys at hockey Canada probably still want ours teams to hit and hit and hit some more to wear the opponent out.

Because a lot of his point production had to do with him playing with Ovechkin, Semin, and Backstrom, and none of those three were going to be on his side in the gold medal game. I disagreed with both of his Norris nods, and I was glad someone else won those years.

I don't really know why we are analyzing the Olympics over a year after the fact here. But Team USA had no expectations and nothing to lose. And Team Canada was playing on home soil under the scrutiny of the entire country. Anything less than a gold, would have been considered a failure, and they basically had everything to lose. And apparently even winning the gold isn't good enough, since it wasn't done in a convincing enough fashion for your liking. Maybe go a bit easy with the pressure next time, and the team might do better.

lukin2006

MFCarissa wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

What's him playing with Russian and Swedes have anything to do with it? Where were they on the day of gold medal game? Green had 70+ points +39 that year and has been nominated for 2 norris trophy's...not bad for a 25 year old. St louis comes down to size I'm. We like our forwards big and physical...some of the old school guys at hockey Canada probably still want ours teams to hit and hit and hit some more to wear the opponent out.

Because a lot of his point production had to do with him playing with Ovechkin, Semin, and Backstrom, and none of those three were going to be on his side in the gold medal game. I disagreed with both of his Norris nods, and I was glad someone else won those years.

I don't really know why we are analyzing the Olympics over a year after the fact here. But Team USA had no expectations and nothing to lose. And Team Canada was playing on home soil under the scrutiny of the entire country. Anything less than a gold, would have been considered a failure, and they basically had everything to lose. And apparently even winning the gold isn't good enough, since it wasn't done in a convincing enough fashion for your liking. Maybe go a bit easy with the pressure next time, and the team might do better.

I just like youth oriented teams...get the younger guys experience...being a Detroit fan youth is a foreign word , I more than satisfied...but we Canadians love our hockey...so we talk about any hockey that comes up.