2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Thanks you were right about winning in 5, you just had the wrong team.In all kidding aside the Sharks won the way the Wings have won for so long. It was like a role reversal. Great series and could have gone either way.
Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
According to local reports, his returning for another season depends on 2 factors:
1. Desire
2. Family (his oldest son was recently accepted into a prestigious soccer school in Sweden).
Nick's always said he wants to raise his kids in Sweden. But he's been saying that for 10 years now too.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
It should be a good game. Philly could have won either game there, but I say the Bruins get it done. Though it should be a very physical game.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
I'm not saying I thought he'd beat the Caps, but if you asked me before the playoffs which goalies were capable of "stealing" a series, I would've said Halak (and Pekka Rinne), because I thought Montreal matched up better against Washington than they did against New Jersey or Buffalo because of the Caps' desire for up-and-down play, which suits Montreal's quick smurf forwards just fine. Also because of Halak's apparent preference to see a lot of rubber (he was 8-0 during the regular season when facing 45+ shots).
If you're wondering why I didn't mention Rask, it's because I didn't consider the Bruins to be much in the way of underdogs.
As for Luongo's contract, I'm opposed to long, multi-year contracts 90% of the time. With the inconsistency of nearly every goalie in clutch situations, it's better to spend your money in other places (the key is the plural on places) and lessen the pressure on your goalie with a solid team on the ice. If money were no object I'd take him in a heartbeat, but because of his contract he is basically locked in Vancouver barring a dumb move with Luongo's permission.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
If Lidstrom retires, this team will be in more trouble than fans will admit.
The man was/is a rock back there and is quite possibly in the top 3 defenseman of all time.
I mean, the dude made Osgood and Howard look good.
Not sure how you replace that, but I see Holland working his butt off to get another true #1 or #2 dman on the roster.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
With all due respect, I love Nick Lidstrom, but the defense was worse than I've seen in years with him on the team. We need to address the blue line regardless of whether he's back or not. And I know Mike Green is much maligned these days, but while he's not a typical shutdown defense man, I'd take him in an instant if he fit into the cap.
Chances are we'll see Kindl up with the big club, but not much else.
I'm still praying their defensive lapses are due to fatigue from playing so much hockey over the last few years (including an Olympic year this season).
On that note, here's your useless fact of the day;
SJ is now officially the first team to advance past the 2nd round in an Olympic year despite having 7+ players play in the games.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
I'm not sure they'll be able to do much this year. With Hudler coming back they don't have a lot of wiggle room under the Cap.
Chances are we'll see Kindl up with the big club, but not much else.
I'm still praying their defensive lapses are due to fatigue from playing so much hockey over the last few years (including an Olympic year this season).
On that note, here's your useless fact of the day;
SJ is now officially the first team to advance past the 2nd round in an Olympic year despite having 7+ players play in the games.
That is a very interesting fact for me.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
I'm not sure they'll be able to do much this year. With Hudler coming back they don't have a lot of wiggle room under the Cap.
Chances are we'll see Kindl up with the big club, but not much else.
I'm still praying their defensive lapses are due to fatigue from playing so much hockey over the last few years (including an Olympic year this season).
On that note, here's your useless fact of the day;
SJ is now officially the first team to advance past the 2nd round in an Olympic year despite having 7+ players play in the games.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Do you know if Green is hurt? For his sake, I hope so. If he turned down an invite to play for Canada at the World Championships after that atrocious postseason, he can kiss any chance of ever playing in an Olympics goodbye.Originally posted by Thrash13Dr. Jones was right in stating that. We should have believed him.Originally posted by slickdtcDrJones brings the stinky cheese is what we've all learned from this debacle.Originally posted by Kipnis22yes your fantasy world when your proven wrong about 95% of your postComment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Useless and incorrect. Three of the four Conference finalists from 2002 had 7+ Olympians each (Detroit 11, Colorado 7, Toronto 7).Originally posted by Thrash13Dr. Jones was right in stating that. We should have believed him.Originally posted by slickdtcDrJones brings the stinky cheese is what we've all learned from this debacle.Originally posted by Kipnis22yes your fantasy world when your proven wrong about 95% of your postComment
-
Originally posted by Thrash13Dr. Jones was right in stating that. We should have believed him.Originally posted by slickdtcDrJones brings the stinky cheese is what we've all learned from this debacle.Originally posted by Kipnis22yes your fantasy world when your proven wrong about 95% of your postComment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
In the same year the Olympics were held? I think money's "fact" was referring to Olympians within that Olympic year and not all time. Either way, he might be wrong. I don't know myself.Comment
Comment