Sounds good, but completely untrue. In 2006, Edmonton did not "get healthy", as they had no significant injuries that season. They also had the worst second-half record (18-14-9) of any playoff participant that season and were 5-4-1 in their last 10 games. Sorry, Scott, no excuses for that one.
2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Sounds good, but completely untrue. In 2006, Edmonton did not "get healthy", as they had no significant injuries that season. They also had the worst second-half record (18-14-9) of any playoff participant that season and were 5-4-1 in their last 10 games. Sorry, Scott, no excuses for that one.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 post -
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Point is, talent isn't everything. The Wings learned it in the 90s (and earlier in this decade all over again). The Sharks' core is still young, so their window isn't closed. They still have time to learn like Detroit did. But until they actually do, they're going to be questioned. The last four years have deprived the Sharks of the benefit of the doubt.Comment
-
Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Sounds good, but completely untrue. In 2006, Edmonton did not "get healthy", as they had no significant injuries that season. They also had the worst second-half record (18-14-9) of any playoff participant that season and were 5-4-1 in their last 10 games. Sorry, Scott, no excuses for that one.Comment
-
Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
That sums it up right there Psy. Until guys like Thorton learn that getting gritty and fighting in the corners for pucks, and setting up in front to screen, tip, deflect, what have you. They won't win. They have the talent to do it. That's really never been a question, what the real question is do the team leaders, the Thortons the Heatleys etc have the heart and desire.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
I'm pretty sure every team has a bunch of "what if" scenarios it can look back on from past postseasons. If the Wings defense was healthy three years ago, they beat the Ducks and win the Cup. If they were healthy last year vs. Pittsburgh, if Samuelsson doesn't hit the post in Game 3, if Cleary's breakaway isn't stopped in Game 6, if Franzen gets it past Scuderi in Game 6, if Kronwall's crossbar shot is 5 inches lower in Game 7, etc...
Every team has its fair share of close calls in the playoffs. The teams with heart overcome them. So Cheechoo hit the post in Game 3 in Edmonton four years ago. The Sharks still led 2-1 after that game. The semis against Detroit three years ago? You mentioned Lang's goal in Game 3, but failed to mention how the Sharks won Game 1 in Detroit and led Game 2 2-0 like two minutes into the game before folding their tents and losing 3-2. Last year against Anaheim? While I agree the Ducks were much better than an 8 seed, they were still a one-line team. Perry and Getzlaf were their only offense in the postseason last year. The Sharks should've been able to beat them, considering how talented they are. But they haven't shown the necessary desire to win in the postseason. The fact that you're skeptical of their chances in a possible second round matchup with Detroit speaks volumes about the heart of the Sharks. The Red Wings lost an entire line of scoring production from last year (Hudler, Samuelsson, Hossa), and you're doubtful about San Jose's ability to beat them.
Point is, talent isn't everything. The Wings learned it in the 90s (and earlier in this decade all over again). The Sharks' core is still young, so their window isn't closed. They still have time to learn like Detroit did. But until they actually do, they're going to be questioned. The last four years have deprived the Sharks of the benefit of the doubt.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
I agree with this big time. But I am different if the Sharks won a cup my life does not change at all, so I am OK with taking wins in the regular season. I guess I am different than most. I get just as much joy from a regular season win then I do with a playoff win. The older I get the easier it gets to live this way too.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
lol, I am saying if they lose they lose. I got enough joy out of their season wins. We just are different, I don't need them to win it all for me to be even happier than I am with their season wins. That is all. I do that with the Vikings and Giants. That is all I am saying. And to be honest with you. I was just as excited with the first win of the Year as I was with their last win. If they win tomorrow I will be no happier than I was their first win of the year. That is all I am saying. Since I started this with my sports teams it is been easier to watch them.Last edited by Scottdau; 04-14-2010, 12:30 AM.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Ok, Wings FTW.
I can't remember the last time they were in the playoffs and can actually relax with a nothing to lose attitude, not that they will mind you but you know what i mean.
Now the Sharks on the other hand....lol. Sorry Scott just had to throw that out there.
Then again this just might be there year!Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
What if we don't have Center Ice package?Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Hall will be a perfect Bruin (although, he'll have to change his number).
Boston has a lot of depth down the middle so grabbing a winger of Hall's calibre is exactly what the doctor ordered.
I can't even imagine what Hall might accomplish lining up with Savard for an entire season. Or Kreijci or Bergeron for that matter.
Lucic, Wheeler, Ryder, Sturm & Hall? Pretty good set of wingers right there.
VS and local Fox Sports feeds.
On another note, anyone see Colin Campbell's warning about warm-up shenanigans? What a joke. When's the last time the NHL had a problem with that.
This man is a complete joke. Even if there were a lot of incidences in the past, nobody's scared of Campbell. A kitten with a ball of yarn is more dangerous than Colie.Last edited by Money99; 04-14-2010, 07:11 AM.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
I'll be surprised if the Oilers pick Hall. They need a star center badly and I think Seguin will fit nicely with Hemsky and Penner.
Hall will be a perfect Bruin (although, he'll have to change his number).
Boston has a lot of depth down the middle so grabbing a winger of Hall's calibre is exactly what the doctor ordered.
I can't even imagine what Hall might accomplish lining up with Savard for an entire season. Or Kreijci or Bergeron for that matter.
Lucic, Wheeler, Ryder, Sturm & Hall? Pretty good set of wingers right there.
Hall on a line with either of those 3 centers, Savard, Bergeron, Kreijci should equal alot of production. Now if only Boston could get a few more bounces every now and then.
I like Julian's systems, I love seeing guys get to the front of the net on nights that the're skating and making it tough on the opposing goaltenders. You're right Hank, Hall on paper is a great fit.Comment
-
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread
Looks like I'm sol for the Av's game tonight and likely most of the series unless Center Ice picks up games which as of right now it is not looking promising...
The local Fox Sports feed will only show teams from the local market and since Versus doesn't have an alternate channel we are at the mercy of the market to decide with game our area will see. For me detroit/Phoenix over COL/SJ.Comment
Comment