Welcome Freedom Lovers, Canadians, Shitposters, Hockey Fans, and Drunkards!
2015-2016 NHL Playoff Bracket Challenge!
Today, we gather to celebrate another year without a Canadian franchise winning The Cup, and the start of another glorious playoffs.
name: Liquid League 2016 pw: lolcanada
Once the playoffs start, please post a SS of your picks and your stupid name so we can shame your awful picks!
Rules!
Must create your bracket before TODAY 7pm Est Wednesday, 4/13! You can't post here or join if you JimmyJRaynor because you are banned from hockey threads! You must talk tons of shit! Bandwagoning is ok so that our less fortunate Canadian friends may participate This is a shitpostin' safe zone. Let 'er rip with stupid gifs!
On April 14 2016 15:56 fLyiNgDroNe wrote: Hawk what the F
what is with Elliot this year? Another shutout, that is what like 5 shutouts in 10 games? Is STL going to make it through first round?
To the posted above - there is no way Pens losing to Rangers this time.
If Rangers win Game 2 I can totally see it, otherwise it might be a quick 4-0. But honestly super hard to count the Rangers out, the team is just built and coached to grind out and win playoff games.
I love how much salt the Blues fans were spitting last night after the game. Yes coaches challenges are stupid and that offsides call swung momentum in the game but Tarasenko didn't have to get goaded into that shitty penalty by Shaw. The Blues broke mentally and the refs wrecked a really solid game. Could be the difference breaker going into Chicago.
I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
my thoughts exactly, i dont get it how the ruling against offside play (not having a player sitting in the opposite zone) suddenly turned into something technical and robotic. Really kills all the creative plays and damages the hockey spirit. The cameras are OK to help refs when they are not sure, but challenging on the matter of inches is just silly.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
I will go on the record that I'm cheering for Washington and Florida this year as I have no Canadian team to Bandwagon on to. But I feel that the only 2 teams in the playoffs this year that can win a Cup are Chicago or LA. I hope I'm proven wrong!
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
Problem with the Challenge is that the Refs are both inconsistent and can't even get the call right despite using replays. How many times during the season did we have goalie interference despite massive evidence showing the offensive player being pushed into the goalie? The Challenge is really a shitshow thats more of a "can we get the refs to call something on this play we fucked up on" more than its challenging something worth challenging. We've for sure had 1 challenge this post-season absolutely change the tempo of a game. How many more will happen?
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
Problem with the Challenge is that the Refs are both inconsistent and can't even get the call right despite using replays. How many times during the season did we have goalie interference despite massive evidence showing the offensive player being pushed into the goalie? The Challenge is really a shitshow thats more of a "can we get the refs to call something on this play we fucked up on" more than its challenging something worth challenging. We've for sure had 1 challenge this post-season absolutely change the tempo of a game. How many more will happen?
I don't think the Refs are inconsistent or bad, in fact they are some of the best the world has to offer. The problem lies within the rules that are open to interpretation. When such rules exist, there's always going to be disagreement, no matter how qualified your refs are. On top of that the two teams and the fans are constantly going to be at each other's throats, because they will both have a valid interpretation that supports their case.
There are so many rules when the referee has to judge a player's intentions it's laughable. Prime example would be the Dallas Stars vs. Minessota Wild game 2, where Roussel kicks the puck onto the goalkeepers back and into the net from BEHIND the net! Is it apparent from his motions he was actually just trying to handle the puck and play it? Yes, it is. So under the current rules the goal is legal, if we put aside the whole notion that players can simulate and pretend things are not intentional via their body language, even though they are in fact intentional. Competitive players at the highest level wouldn't do such a thing to gain an edge right, or would they? Additionally, no matter how you look at the replay it just bloody looks like this is soccer, not ice hockey. Sure pucks can deflect of people's bodies and skates and be legal goals, but this one in particular just screams at me, that it's not hockey, what a ridiculous goal. The solution is to make rules clear and not open to interpretation. If a goal comes of an attacking player's skate blade just disallow it and to hell with intentionality and distinct kicking motions. We may have less goals, but at least the rules will be clear and not open to interpretation.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
I don't think he means that checking the replay for rule legality and making sure to get it right is against the spirit of the game, that's fine. What's against the spirit of the game are the constant interruptions to play it causes, therefore the rules need to be more lenient, so that we don't have a 5 minute investigation on each 3rd goal.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
Problem with the Challenge is that the Refs are both inconsistent and can't even get the call right despite using replays. How many times during the season did we have goalie interference despite massive evidence showing the offensive player being pushed into the goalie? The Challenge is really a shitshow thats more of a "can we get the refs to call something on this play we fucked up on" more than its challenging something worth challenging. We've for sure had 1 challenge this post-season absolutely change the tempo of a game. How many more will happen?
I don't think the Refs are inconsistent or bad, in fact they are some of the best the world has to offer. The problem lies within the rules that are open to interpretation. When such rules exist, there's always going to be disagreement, no matter how qualified your refs are. On top of that the two teams and the fans are constantly going to be at each other's throats, because they will both have a valid interpretation that supports their case.
There are so many rules when the referee has to judge a player's intentions it's laughable. Prime example would be the Dallas Stars vs. Minessota Wild game 2, where Roussel kicks the puck onto the goalkeepers back and into the net from BEHIND the net! Is it apparent from his motions he was actually just trying to handle the puck and play it? Yes, it is. So under the current rules the goal is legal, if we put aside the whole notion that players can simulate and pretend things are not intentional via their body language, even though they are in fact intentional. Competitive players at the highest level wouldn't do such a thing to gain an edge right, or would they? Additionally, no matter how you look at the replay it just bloody looks like this is soccer, not ice hockey. Sure pucks can deflect of people's bodies and skates and be legal goals, but this one in particular just screams at me, that it's not hockey, what a ridiculous goal. The solution is to make rules clear and not open to interpretation. If a goal comes of an attacking player's skate blade just disallow it and to hell with intentionality and distinct kicking motions. We may have less goals, but at least the rules will be clear and not open to interpretation.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
I don't think he means that checking the replay for rule legality and making sure to get it right is against the spirit of the game, that's fine. What's against the spirit of the game are the constant interruptions to play it causes, therefore the rules need to be more lenient, so that we don't have a 5 minute investigation on each 3rd goal.
Refs have been horribly inconsistent this year with reviews involving Goalie Interference. The rules are very clear that there cannot be interference called on a play where the defenseman pushes the offensive player into the goalie and yet there have been at least a dozen times that I can think of at the least where that happened and interference was called regardless. It got to a point near the last third or so of the season there was a consistent amount of it going on clearly on purpose trying to fish for the interference call. There's room for interpretation but when there's clearly defined rules on a call and half the time they're followed and half the time they aren't isn't interpretation its straight up inconsistency.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
Problem with the Challenge is that the Refs are both inconsistent and can't even get the call right despite using replays. How many times during the season did we have goalie interference despite massive evidence showing the offensive player being pushed into the goalie? The Challenge is really a shitshow thats more of a "can we get the refs to call something on this play we fucked up on" more than its challenging something worth challenging. We've for sure had 1 challenge this post-season absolutely change the tempo of a game. How many more will happen?
I don't think the Refs are inconsistent or bad, in fact they are some of the best the world has to offer. The problem lies within the rules that are open to interpretation. When such rules exist, there's always going to be disagreement, no matter how qualified your refs are. On top of that the two teams and the fans are constantly going to be at each other's throats, because they will both have a valid interpretation that supports their case.
There are so many rules when the referee has to judge a player's intentions it's laughable. Prime example would be the Dallas Stars vs. Minessota Wild game 2, where Roussel kicks the puck onto the goalkeepers back and into the net from BEHIND the net! Is it apparent from his motions he was actually just trying to handle the puck and play it? Yes, it is. So under the current rules the goal is legal, if we put aside the whole notion that players can simulate and pretend things are not intentional via their body language, even though they are in fact intentional. Competitive players at the highest level wouldn't do such a thing to gain an edge right, or would they? Additionally, no matter how you look at the replay it just bloody looks like this is soccer, not ice hockey. Sure pucks can deflect of people's bodies and skates and be legal goals, but this one in particular just screams at me, that it's not hockey, what a ridiculous goal. The solution is to make rules clear and not open to interpretation. If a goal comes of an attacking player's skate blade just disallow it and to hell with intentionality and distinct kicking motions. We may have less goals, but at least the rules will be clear and not open to interpretation.
On April 18 2016 02:13 QuanticHawk wrote:
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
I don't think he means that checking the replay for rule legality and making sure to get it right is against the spirit of the game, that's fine. What's against the spirit of the game are the constant interruptions to play it causes, therefore the rules need to be more lenient, so that we don't have a 5 minute investigation on each 3rd goal.
Refs have been horribly inconsistent this year with reviews involving Goalie Interference. The rules are very clear that there cannot be interference called on a play where the defenseman pushes the offensive player into the goalie and yet there have been at least a dozen times that I can think of at the least where that happened and interference was called regardless. It got to a point near the last third or so of the season there was a consistent amount of it going on clearly on purpose trying to fish for the interference call. There's room for interpretation but when there's clearly defined rules on a call and half the time they're followed and half the time they aren't isn't interpretation its straight up inconsistency.
Sure, there were a bunch of bad and inconsistent calls. That doesn't take away from the fact that rules should be simple and not open to interpretation, because then the human error of referees is way multiplied by the systematic errors originating from the system. How do you draw the line between the offensive player being pushed into the goalie, and the offensive player pretending to be pushed in order to interfere with the goalie? The offensive player can even hit against the defenseman signalling that he wants to get away and then pretend to be bumped back onto the goalie. How does a referee see that and read the players intentions? These rules are open to interpretation and highly sensitive to human error, so effectively, they are bad rules.
What I am saying is that when a ref makes a mistake it should be crystal clear he made a mistake when the decision is reviewed. There shouldn't be a number of competing and equally valid interpretations of the same events on the ice, because these rules should when at all possible be defined by physical events and boundaries and not by players' intentions where the referee has to read their body language and minds to make the correct call. Yes, there will be situations that are impossible to define physically, but they should be kept at a minimum, which currently is not the case at all.
On April 22 2016 05:24 JimmiC wrote: I think the sharks are putting it together this year. or maybe its hope. Either way I would love to see thorton win, one of the good guys in hockey and so underrated.
On paper, this is the best Sharks team that they have iced since 2009. They have a legit top line, two excellent #1 d-men (Burns and Vlasic), a solid goalie, and plenty of depth at all positions. I am also very pleasantly surprised at how good of a coach DeBoer is, which is directly translating into how good the power play looks. That said, I am continually bothered (as are Sharks fans in general) at how some of the prominent Sharks keep getting rubbed out on the score sheet -- notably Couture and Marleau. Marleau is playing on the third line, FFS. With his skillset, he should be dominating the ice. Granted, the Kings are unquestionably an elite 5v5 team that can roll four solid lines, but I still feel like the Sharks' 2nd - 4th lines are not playing as well as they should be. The Sharks first line and power play are carrying the team hard. It's also critical that Jones is keeping up with Quick's ridiculously good goaltending in this series.
Elimination game for the Kings, and they get outscored 2-0 and outshot 13-4 in the first period. All they have to show for themselves is a dirty slash on Pavelski. That whole team can eat a bag of dicks.
On April 23 2016 16:12 Kyhron wrote: So how bout the Flyers winning when getting out shot 44-11
I just have that gut feeling that STL and WAS are both gearing up for their annual playoff chokes
I can't really even call STL choking they won 2 games off lucky bounces in games they got severely outplayed and Hitchcock cant contend with the patented Coach Q line blender. Granted that entire series has been a shit show from the refs so who knows. I think if the Hawks even the series today they break the Blues mentally and take the series in game 7
On April 24 2016 08:40 QuanticHawk wrote: I AM SO MAD SHITFUCK
What took you so long? I want real time QQ.
MODS???? HARASSMENT??????
thankfully i was getting treated at a bar/steakhouse, so i had more than enough liquor to soothe the ache that was embarassing. The Rangers d is so, so bad these days
I think they're actually in ok position. Hank has got another 3-4 top 10 goalie years in him imo (his 5v5 SV% was #1 this year iirc). They need to make Girardi, Boyle, and Staal disappear from the blueline. I think McIlrath is an ok nhl dman at this point. Skjei seems like a legit good 2 way dman. I'm actually pretty excited about him, and I think at this point both guys will be up next year, and be better players than those mentioned. Boyle retires, I think. That right there fixes some problems in the back, but still.
up front, I think they need to move Nash while they can still get value, if possible. It hurts they don't have a bonafide stud forward, but I think across the board they have depth. Buchnevich is thought to be a potential first line forwrad someday, so that is nice, but it hurts that they need someone now, Ideally. Best pray he's like the studs Chicago shits out year after year. I still think Kredier has 30-30 potential in him, esp with more time.
I mean with Hank in net and 3 pretty balanced but no stand out froward lines, the Rangers are still probably in the playoff hunt, but they've gotta do something.
im still very much impressed of how incredible Caps defense improved this year. I mean from being complete shit like a year or two ago to being almost flawless these days, its mindblowing. That definitely won them this series imo
Neuvirth allowed 2 goals against 105 shots in 3 games. In 13 career playoff games, he now has a 1.92 GAA and a .933 save percentage. Pretty impressive stuff. Too bad he doesn't have a real team. That 44 save shutout in game 5 while his team only gets 10 shots is kind of sad.
Having watched Greiss on the Sharks for a number of years, I strongly suspect that what we're seeing from Greiss is an aberration as opposed to the emergence of a legit starting goaltender.
he is, him and Rust (also a great hockey name) are a major reason why the Pens looked good down the stretch. They stoppedl ooking like a 2 line team because of guys like that
Uhm... not so sure about international tournaments. There are a couple of issues right now with the ones existing.
Half the tourneys lack full rosters, because several leagues (mostly NHL) don't let their players (or at least only a few) play. This kills any excitement. Like whenever one of the big nations loses, it is just "yeah, they only played with random dudes, all the good ones were at home". And the smaller hockey nations would probably love to see their "stars" to play for the national team amongst their local league players. But that won't happen most of the time. Then there are like a ton of cups, championships and what not, pretty much like in Starcraft. I really prefer the very clear cut system of footie. There is a continental championship every x(=4) years, there is a world cup every y(=4) years, there are qualifiers for those in between, and sometimes a friendly. That's it. And not this mess like in hockey.
Oh, and don't get me started on this nonsense like Worldcup of hockey or however it is called this autumn. Such retarded bullshit. Could have called it the NHL player nations championship or something like that. And the ads for it are even more retarded... Yeah, it is about the crest on the front. Sure thing bro. McJesus will be so proud to fight for Team North America against Team USA and Team Canada. And the Euro mix team of the remains... Beh. Leave me alone.
So in the end most of the international games are just failing because of the NHL not letting players play (and then making up their own donkey tourney). In the end this leaves the Olympics as only relevant international tourney, and somehow I can't give a damn about team events at the Olympics. Probably because in many sports is just a random event with lower competition. And still I watch it, because it is the only somehow reasonable international hockey you can get.
Oh, and cheering order is: Germany(obv) > Czechia(proximity, Jagr bonus) > Finland/Sweden(likable nations) > other Euros(underdogs, proximity) > Canada(I'm forced to) > USA (being prefered only to russia can not really be called a preference) > Russia(sorry, don't like them) But some individual players may change that.
Oh, and a last point against international games: They usually end up weird, because teams suddenly basically field 12 forwards, that would usually be a first (scoring) line on a club team. This somehow destroys the usual strategic structure of a team. Or you have issues like a German team... Do you now field Kuhnhackl on your 3rd or 4th line, playing the same role as he does in the NHL and let him do what he does best? And have some DEL first liners play first line as well? Or do you now suddenly give a Kuhnhackl a completely different role by letting him play 1st, because he is probably among the most talented forwards(okay, we have Draisaitl)?
On April 28 2016 01:15 mahrgell wrote: Uhm... not so sure about international tournaments. There are a couple of issues right now with the ones existing.
Half the tourneys lack full rosters, because several leagues (mostly NHL) don't let their players (or at least only a few) play. This kills any excitement. Like whenever one of the big nations loses, it is just "yeah, they only played with random dudes, all the good ones were at home". And the smaller hockey nations would probably love to see their "stars" to play for the national team amongst their local league players. But that won't happen most of the time. Then there are like a ton of cups, championships and what not, pretty much like in Starcraft. I really prefer the very clear cut system of footie. There is a continental championship every x(=4) years, there is a world cup every y(=4) years, there are qualifiers for those in between, and sometimes a friendly. That's it. And not this mess like in hockey.
Oh, and don't get me started on this nonsense like Worldcup of hockey or however it is called this autumn. Such retarded bullshit. Could have called it the NHL player nations championship or something like that. And the ads for it are even more retarded... Yeah, it is about the crest on the front. Sure thing bro. McJesus will be so proud to fight for Team North America against Team USA and Team Canada. And the Euro mix team of the remains... Beh. Leave me alone.
So in the end most of the international games are just failing because of the NHL not letting players play (and then making up their own donkey tourney). In the end this leaves the Olympics as only relevant international tourney, and somehow I can't give a damn about team events at the Olympics. Probably because in many sports is just a random event with lower competition. And still I watch it, because it is the only somehow reasonable international hockey you can get.
Oh, and cheering order is: Germany(obv) > Czechia(proximity, Jagr bonus) > Finland/Sweden(likable nations) > other Euros(underdogs, proximity) > Canada(I'm forced to) > USA (being prefered only to russia can not really be called a preference) > Russia(sorry, don't like them) But some individual players may change that.
Oh, and a last point against international games: They usually end up weird, because teams suddenly basically field 12 forwards, that would usually be a first (scoring) line on a club team. This somehow destroys the usual strategic structure of a team. Or you have issues like a German team... Do you now field Kuhnhackl on your 3rd or 4th line, playing the same role as he does in the NHL and let him do what he does best? And have some DEL first liners play first line as well? Or do you now suddenly give a Kuhnhackl a completely different role by letting him play 1st, because he is probably among the most talented forwards(okay, we have Draisaitl)?
I 2nd most of that. I do watch the World Championship if i have time, but it's nothing in comparison with Olympics. Didn't even know about the Worldcup of Hockey in autumn. ^^
Cheering order would be Germany -> Switzerland (Germany 2) -> Sweden -> Canada -> Rest of the World -> USA -> Russia. Of course this is subject to change with playstyle/ who plays and stuff. I can get behind every team if I really like what i see
Whats the football (soccer) cheering order for you NA people?
lol so much hate to my Russians who struggled all last (6?) Olympics. Sometimes undeservingly so. I mean how can one not like Datsyuk or Geno or Ovechkin?! Weird.
Crawford had better save%, 7 shutouts and missed 15ish games to injury while playing behind one of the most lopsided D corps in hardest division in hockey. Quick had minutely better GAA, a few more wins and played in the soft Pacific
On April 28 2016 01:15 mahrgell wrote: Uhm... not so sure about international tournaments. There are a couple of issues right now with the ones existing.
Half the tourneys lack full rosters, because several leagues (mostly NHL) don't let their players (or at least only a few) play. This kills any excitement. Like whenever one of the big nations loses, it is just "yeah, they only played with random dudes, all the good ones were at home". And the smaller hockey nations would probably love to see their "stars" to play for the national team amongst their local league players. But that won't happen most of the time. Then there are like a ton of cups, championships and what not, pretty much like in Starcraft. I really prefer the very clear cut system of footie. There is a continental championship every x(=4) years, there is a world cup every y(=4) years, there are qualifiers for those in between, and sometimes a friendly. That's it. And not this mess like in hockey.
Oh, and don't get me started on this nonsense like Worldcup of hockey or however it is called this autumn. Such retarded bullshit. Could have called it the NHL player nations championship or something like that. And the ads for it are even more retarded... Yeah, it is about the crest on the front. Sure thing bro. McJesus will be so proud to fight for Team North America against Team USA and Team Canada. And the Euro mix team of the remains... Beh. Leave me alone.
So in the end most of the international games are just failing because of the NHL not letting players play (and then making up their own donkey tourney). In the end this leaves the Olympics as only relevant international tourney, and somehow I can't give a damn about team events at the Olympics. Probably because in many sports is just a random event with lower competition. And still I watch it, because it is the only somehow reasonable international hockey you can get.
Oh, and cheering order is: Germany(obv) > Czechia(proximity, Jagr bonus) > Finland/Sweden(likable nations) > other Euros(underdogs, proximity) > Canada(I'm forced to) > USA (being prefered only to russia can not really be called a preference) > Russia(sorry, don't like them) But some individual players may change that.
Oh, and a last point against international games: They usually end up weird, because teams suddenly basically field 12 forwards, that would usually be a first (scoring) line on a club team. This somehow destroys the usual strategic structure of a team. Or you have issues like a German team... Do you now field Kuhnhackl on your 3rd or 4th line, playing the same role as he does in the NHL and let him do what he does best? And have some DEL first liners play first line as well? Or do you now suddenly give a Kuhnhackl a completely different role by letting him play 1st, because he is probably among the most talented forwards(okay, we have Draisaitl)?
I 2nd most of that. I do watch the World Championship if i have time, but it's nothing in comparison with Olympics. Didn't even know about the Worldcup of Hockey in autumn. ^^
Cheering order would be Germany -> Switzerland (Germany 2) -> Sweden -> Canada -> Rest of the World -> USA -> Russia. Of course this is subject to change with playstyle/ who plays and stuff. I can get behind every team if I really like what i see
Whats the football (soccer) cheering order for you NA people?
For me it is pretty much I cheer for upsets and than if I get watching and a team plays an exciting style I will cheer for them even if they are a power (Germany in the last and Spain before that). Most people here will also cheer for what ever country their grandparents or parents came from. I'm a 5th generation Canadian so that draw is not as much but I do have some English roots (Irish and Scottish too) so I do follow them and a decade ago they had a player Hargraves who grew up in the city I did so there was that.
I cheer for Germany because Klose has been fun to yell the last 12 years and because Germany has the most fun style to watch. Then Nederlands next for the same reason > England because of Rooney > Canada > underdogs > Portugal > Spain > USA
On April 28 2016 01:15 mahrgell wrote: Uhm... not so sure about international tournaments. There are a couple of issues right now with the ones existing.
Half the tourneys lack full rosters, because several leagues (mostly NHL) don't let their players (or at least only a few) play. This kills any excitement. Like whenever one of the big nations loses, it is just "yeah, they only played with random dudes, all the good ones were at home". And the smaller hockey nations would probably love to see their "stars" to play for the national team amongst their local league players. But that won't happen most of the time. Then there are like a ton of cups, championships and what not, pretty much like in Starcraft. I really prefer the very clear cut system of footie. There is a continental championship every x(=4) years, there is a world cup every y(=4) years, there are qualifiers for those in between, and sometimes a friendly. That's it. And not this mess like in hockey.
Oh, and don't get me started on this nonsense like Worldcup of hockey or however it is called this autumn. Such retarded bullshit. Could have called it the NHL player nations championship or something like that. And the ads for it are even more retarded... Yeah, it is about the crest on the front. Sure thing bro. McJesus will be so proud to fight for Team North America against Team USA and Team Canada. And the Euro mix team of the remains... Beh. Leave me alone.
So in the end most of the international games are just failing because of the NHL not letting players play (and then making up their own donkey tourney). In the end this leaves the Olympics as only relevant international tourney, and somehow I can't give a damn about team events at the Olympics. Probably because in many sports is just a random event with lower competition. And still I watch it, because it is the only somehow reasonable international hockey you can get.
Oh, and cheering order is: Germany(obv) > Czechia(proximity, Jagr bonus) > Finland/Sweden(likable nations) > other Euros(underdogs, proximity) > Canada(I'm forced to) > USA (being prefered only to russia can not really be called a preference) > Russia(sorry, don't like them) But some individual players may change that.
Oh, and a last point against international games: They usually end up weird, because teams suddenly basically field 12 forwards, that would usually be a first (scoring) line on a club team. This somehow destroys the usual strategic structure of a team. Or you have issues like a German team... Do you now field Kuhnhackl on your 3rd or 4th line, playing the same role as he does in the NHL and let him do what he does best? And have some DEL first liners play first line as well? Or do you now suddenly give a Kuhnhackl a completely different role by letting him play 1st, because he is probably among the most talented forwards(okay, we have Draisaitl)?
I 2nd most of that. I do watch the World Championship if i have time, but it's nothing in comparison with Olympics. Didn't even know about the Worldcup of Hockey in autumn. ^^
Cheering order would be Germany -> Switzerland (Germany 2) -> Sweden -> Canada -> Rest of the World -> USA -> Russia. Of course this is subject to change with playstyle/ who plays and stuff. I can get behind every team if I really like what i see
Whats the football (soccer) cheering order for you NA people?
For me it is pretty much I cheer for upsets and than if I get watching and a team plays an exciting style I will cheer for them even if they are a power (Germany in the last and Spain before that). Most people here will also cheer for what ever country their grandparents or parents came from. I'm a 5th generation Canadian so that draw is not as much but I do have some English roots (Irish and Scottish too) so I do follow them and a decade ago they had a player Hargraves who grew up in the city I did so there was that.
I cheer for Germany because Klose has been fun to yell the last 12 years and because Germany has the most fun style to watch. Then Nederlands next for the same reason > England because of Rooney > Canada > underdogs > Portugal > Spain > USA
whoo Oshie
I hope we can keep up our playstyle. I'm really excited for our Championship roster this year. Also #BraGer 1:7, #NeverForget haha :D
Greiss is doing amazing from what i read the other day! Go Islanders!
Ducks coach gets fired, I'm happy I hopped off the ducks bandwagon a few years back
Blues lose a gross one in Dallas, they need to readjust and take shots from the slot. They primarily took point shots against Chicago because of the crazy shot blocking but Dallas is way leakier. Pls Hitchcock.
Draft day is today!! Let's go Leafs~ end the Edmonton reign of terror. I'm okay with #2 or #3, just not #4 pls, we deserve a release from the pains of Carlyle
On May 01 2016 10:34 xDaunt wrote: Caps may be ready for their annual spring swoon now. Pens are really taking it to them.
caps looked like they were getting outplayed for 50 minutes of the game but for 49 of those 50 minutes they were doing real good at blocking off the fat rebounds holtby was giving up and generally not letting the penguins get guys free 5-10 feet in front of the crease, right down the middle. both pens goals the caps defense either didn't show up in the middle or lost inside position to the middle.
you also can't be lazy and let geno scoop up a free puck in the corner and turn towards the net uncontested, bad things are gonna happen to your team. caps defense was very lazy at times tonight.
a lot of guys having pucks wander off their sticks or go through their legs etc. for both teams tonight too.
On May 01 2016 12:50 JimmiC wrote: It sure has that 7 game feel. Living up to the billing other than the crobsy vs great 8 thing
i would say i dunno if it was still the end of the 2nd period, caps look beat for the second half of that period
but letang with a dumb hit earlier in the 2nd will prob get suspended for a game, and the caps look alive now in the 3rd. probably too late for this game but the series isn't over yet now.
On May 11 2016 20:48 QuanticHawk wrote: god fuckin caps man
should came away with like 3 goals on those 3 straight fuckin penalies
yeah but before that should came away with like at least 2 wins on those 3 straight fucking wins of pens. Pens won all their games with a 1 goal difference and there was really no reason except some luck for the series to go into 3-1.
EDIT: fucking well done Blues, knocking out 2 of the scariest teams in the west.
On May 11 2016 20:48 QuanticHawk wrote: god fuckin caps man
should came away with like 3 goals on those 3 straight fuckin penalies
yeah but before that should came away with like at least 2 wins on those 3 straight fucking wins of pens. Pens won all their games with a 1 goal difference and there was really no reason except some luck for the series to go into 3-1.
EDIT: fucking well done Blues, knocking out 2 of the scariest teams in the west.
The Stars don't qualify as a scary team with their trash-ass goaltending.
On May 13 2016 13:10 JimmiC wrote: West is pretty cool final, it's like the two choker clubs finally made it. I mean one will technically choke but still. I think I'm hoping sharks for Thorton, so underrated, so good
yeah i was thinking about that too, grieving over caps keeping their playoffs fail tradition. i really hope west wins the cup now Go Blues!!! PS. wasn't Troy Brower kinda shit in Caps?
Let's go TAMPA xD So far so good but the loss of Bishop is scary. I don't think Vasy has what it takes to carry the team yet, although I hope I'm wrong :D
Despite the naysayers I believe the lightning with Bishop have what it takes to take out the pens.
As a Sharks [fan], I shouldn't even be saying this, but the Sharks look like a team that's going to win the Cup. They are playing lights out hockey at both ends of the ice. DeBoer's system is really paying off now. He's relentlessly rolling four lines and not really giving a fuck about matchups. Hell, he'll even throw the 4th line out against the Blues' top lines, and the 4th line has carried the play. On the few occasions when the Blues do get some zone pressure on the Sharks, everything is on the outside. Very little gets into the slot. I doubt that a traffic cone would have much worse stats than Martin Jones in this series. The Blues are lucky to only be down 2-1 instead of 3-0.
And I'm a little suspicious that Couture heard my "he's a perpetual bitch in the playoffs" comment at the start of the Kings series, because since then, he's turned in a Conn Smythe-level performance. Hell, Couture, Burns, and Pavelski are all in the running for it at this rate.
this playoffs really shapes to be one of the best ones in recent years. At this moment any combination of the remaining 4 teams for the Cup Finals looks fantastic. My hopes are on Bolts-Blues, but Sharks are so good too. And of course a log fucking overdue for giants Thornton and Pavelski.
Blues just played like shit the entire series. Sharks deserve the win. Ugh. I wish it could've been more entertaining instead of one-sided stomps. I guess I'm not going to buy an Elliott jersey They prob will trade him or something now...
On May 26 2016 14:25 Blisse wrote: Blues just played like shit the entire series. Sharks deserve the win. Ugh. I wish it could've been more entertaining instead of one-sided stomps. I guess I'm not going to buy an Elliott jersey They prob will trade him or something now...
The Blues were too slow. The Sharks murdered them with pace.
On May 26 2016 14:25 Blisse wrote: Blues just played like shit the entire series. Sharks deserve the win. Ugh. I wish it could've been more entertaining instead of one-sided stomps. I guess I'm not going to buy an Elliott jersey They prob will trade him or something now...
The Blues were too slow. The Sharks murdered them with pace.
yep and i dont see how this is Elliots loss all that much. If Pens go through the finals will have 2 highpaced teams clashing Would be fun!
On May 26 2016 14:25 Blisse wrote: Blues just played like shit the entire series. Sharks deserve the win. Ugh. I wish it could've been more entertaining instead of one-sided stomps. I guess I'm not going to buy an Elliott jersey They prob will trade him or something now...
The Blues were too slow. The Sharks murdered them with pace.
yep and i dont see how this is Elliots loss all that much. If Pens go through the finals will have 2 highpaced teams clashing Would be fun!
Yeah, this Blues series loss definitely wasn't the result of bad goaltending. The Sharks were clearly the better team in five of the six games, and absolutely dominant in four of those games. The Sharks relentlessly controlled the middle of the ice and the blue lines. Whenever the Blues managed to get into the Sharks zone, they were stuck on the outside and rarely got any good scoring chances. On the other hand, the Sharks' speed created numerous turnovers which fueled their transition game.
I think that the other thing that is being overlooked is the difference in quality between the Shark's defense and everyone else that they are playing in the playoffs. Being able to roll two legit #1 defensive pairings (Vlasic and Braun, Burns and Martin) is a huge luxury. And for as much shit as Sharks fans give the third pairing of Dillon and Pollak, they are very clearly the best third pairing in the playoffs and have been able to play substantial minutes, keeping the top four defensemen fresh as each series has gone on. In contrast, the top pairings of LA, Nashville, and the Blues each were noticeably ground down towards end of each of their respective series against the Sharks, resulting in a substantial defense lapses in the final games (and lopsided scores).
Also, I continue to be impressed by the play of the Shark's fourth line. They have been possession monsters ever since DeBoer started playing Zubrus.
All in all, this is a really good Sharks team, and I think that they are well-equipped to handle whomever they face in the finals.
According to the rules of the thread, I hereby declare myself the new king of TL hockey as winner of the bracket challenge. Please bow to your new ruler! Now I understand, that this may be less caused by own greatness but by your collective not-so-greatness, but that is how it is.
Just to summarize: - A German (you know, that country when you mention hockey, everyone thinks of field hockey...) - watched only German 2nd and 3rd div hockey until half year ago (hey, but at least they play on real fields, not those tiny holes) - forced, under threat, to watch the 2nd half of the Habs season (okay, it makes it easier to get into it, watching about the same level as what I was used to) - completely guestimating the bracket challenge
Yeah... That guy was still better than you. All of you! Shame on TL hockey!
On May 27 2016 13:42 Valiver wrote: I'm rank 66 overall in their hat trick challenge, and was tied for 3rd near the end of the second round, does that count for anything?
Hmmm... I would say, the TL Bracket Challenge is equivalent to the Olympics, and the hattrick challenge is like the WCoH, won by TeamNA. Sorry. But maybe I can find some position for you at my court.
aight i have a serious question to y'all experts here: what is it about Penguins this year? The games that i caught from end of season and in playoffs, i was blown away with the speed they are skating, handling the puck and passing around. This is quite a different style of play from what they showed previous seasons, and even from the Cup winning team of 2009. So what is it? Did the coach specifically selected players with Usain Bolt abilities? Or did he put the players in a special conditioning program to boost their speed? I mean look at Malkin - he is TOO slow and too powerful for this team, really doesn't fit it Both coaches and players from Caps/Bolts say they hit a hot team, however how can you change your team so quickly to play so differently?
the ability to roll 3-4 good lines every ight is huge for pitt too. With Sid, Malkin, and Hot Dog, they can have a stud on every line for the top 9 if they so choose, and they do that at times. Having that HBK line is great for them.
On May 27 2016 12:02 mahrgell wrote: According to the rules of the thread, I hereby declare myself the new king of TL hockey as winner of the bracket challenge. Please bow to your new ruler! Now I understand, that this may be less caused by own greatness but by your collective not-so-greatness, but that is how it is.
Just to summarize: - A German (you know, that country when you mention hockey, everyone thinks of field hockey...) - watched only German 2nd and 3rd div hockey until half year ago (hey, but at least they play on real fields, not those tiny holes) - forced, under threat, to watch the 2nd half of the Habs season (okay, it makes it easier to get into it, watching about the same level as what I was used to) - completely guestimating the bracket challenge
Yeah... That guy was still better than you. All of you! Shame on TL hockey!
Kessel's 5th overall in playoff scoring, 3rd in goals, doesn't make team USA. No Okposo or Tyler Johnson either. Meanwhile, Abdelkader was one of the first people added to the team. Ok then.
On May 29 2016 16:28 GolemMadness wrote: Kessel's 5th overall in playoff scoring, 3rd in goals, doesn't make team USA. No Okposo or Tyler Johnson either. Meanwhile, Abdelkader was one of the first people added to the team. Ok then.
Maybe they want to wait on Kessel to see how he's feeling post Cup Finals? No Okposo really isn't that surprising. TyJo kinda is and Abdelkader just makes it because of his name or something I dunno got nothing for that one.
Bah, these games look like the Sharks playoff games of old -- bad brainfarts resulting in goals for the opposing team, while the Sharks continuously shoot the puck into the chest of the goalie. That doesn't even tell the whole tale, though, because the Pens' speed has clearly been problematic for the Sharks. Maybe the Sharks will win one more out of pride, but I think that they're done.
And goddamn, Marleau is brutal to watch. Zero finish whatsoever.
Eh, I'd rather the Pens finish off the Sharks tonight. Quick euthanasia is better than prolonged suffering at this point. The Sharks haven't held a lead once in four games. That, along with the eye test, says all that I need to know regarding their chances to come back.
Murray or Kessel 100% should have gotten it over him. Was purely on name. He wasn't bad, but was also effectively shut down at plenty of points. Kessel was a man on a mission all playoffs, and Murray bailed out a shitty defense time and time again.
Meh. I hope Kessel eats 20 hot dogs out of the Cup.
Crosby dominated the play nearly every time he was on the ice in the hardest match ups. Murray was very good for the first two rounds, then was just good. Against Tampa and San Jose, he never once faced more than 30 shots, and his SV% was 912. Martin Jones faced more than 40 shots 3 times against Pittsburgh.
im looking forward to girardi and staal disappearing so the rangers can sign Stamkos and watch him die of a blood clot no more than 30 seconds after signing
On June 30 2016 04:39 JimmiC wrote: Hall for larsson straight up? Same old oilers.
What a bad trade....Larsson is a good defenceman and what EDM needs so pursuing him makes sense but for Hall straight across....NJ is stealing. If we got some picks or a good prospect along with Larsson then I'd probably be ok with the deal.
Taylor Hall was our only useful trade chip to get what we needed on the market so he was destined to get traded anyways. Eberle played amazing with McDavid so that was not gonna happen and Yakupov is a big time bust. RNH plays center, a position we are not too deep in too begin with.
On June 30 2016 05:27 JimmiC wrote: Wow subban for webber. Nsh got fleeced.
Montreal got fleeced IMO
Idk, Weber does almost everything better except being apealing to fans imo. It is also known that PK's teammates couldnt stant him anymore because of his antics...
Its like the Chelios trade all over again but this time they get a top player in return.
nah not a fleecing either way. I would def say it helps Nash more. younger, more mobile. i dont really see any major benefit for the habs on it though.
fleecing is whatever the fuck edmonton just did, goddamn. that is an awful trade. I think Larsson will be an ok NHLer, but he is no where near the value of Hall.
Yeah, I think Nashville comes out ahead in that trade. Converting an old/aging blue chip asset into younger one is almost always a good idea if you can do it efficiently, which they clearly did.
The Habs just completely and utterly fucked themselves. Subban is better, and younger, but they traded him because hes black, in exchange for a worse D-man on a worse contract. OLE OLE OLE OLE OLE. This is the best day as a Bruins fan since they won the cup.
On June 30 2016 06:29 JimmiC wrote: Pretty sure they desperately wanted away from subban before the no trade and now they have a great asset, because weber gets cheaper as he gets older making him very attractive to budget teams.
So you trade away an elite defenceman in his prime for an elite defenceman leaving his prime but will look great as trade bait later on?
The makes the same amount of sense as trading Hall for Larsson.
On June 30 2016 07:12 JimmiC wrote: Except Subban is not a great a Dman. And teammates hate him.
If anything being black helps Subban, not only does it make him standout, we are also so damn PC in Canada people are scared to say anything bad about him out of fear of being called a racist.
?
Ignoring the baseless his teamamtes hate him shit, hes better on defense and offense than Weber. Add in him being younger, and his contract being better, and I want some of what you're smoking.
Canada has made tons of poor choices before so that doesn't mean much. And getting picked to team Canada is a lot different than a trade heads up. Even if weber is better--highly debatable--he is not that much so to make up for a three year age difference, him being 30, slower and slowing, and being signed through 40 at an $8m cap hit
The only clear gain is that his real money was front loaded so he's technically cheaper. But mtl gets his back 9. Nash is getting mostly prime years from pk
On June 30 2016 13:29 Jaaaaasper wrote: It looks like the habs got rid of Subban to keep Therrien. Maybe you do that with a amazing coach, but not with fucking Therien.
My thoughts exactly. Excuse me while I go drink myself into a coma for this season....
On June 30 2016 13:29 Jaaaaasper wrote: It looks like the habs got rid of Subban to keep Therrien. Maybe you do that with a amazing coach, but not with fucking Therien.
He speaks French. It's pretty much the only reason he is employed in the NHL right now.
Alright so after sleeping on it I guess I'm okay with the Weber Subban trade. The issue really isn't comparing the two in skill or in contract differences, as they are decently similar, the problem is we're losing the face of the franchise and captain. Subban can of course step up to be a leader and we know he's vocal and a good guy, but I'm guessing Fisher or Josi will get captain now. There's not a lot of other veterans on the team besides Rinne and Neal, Jackman and Ribero might (hopefully) be gone, and the rest are all pretty young or not known to be leaders. Most people around here are just very sad to see Weber go, he was our hero even though Josi arguably outplayed him this year (besides on the Power Play of course, load the Weber strat too strong). We're also losing a bit of grit. No one wanted to mess with Weber and he would stand up for the other guys.
Also I hate having to root for 2 Montreal players now, Weber and Price.
On July 01 2016 02:26 Valiver wrote: Alright so after sleeping on it I guess I'm okay with the Weber Subban trade. The issue really isn't comparing the two in skill or in contract differences, as they are decently similar, the problem is we're losing the face of the franchise and captain. Subban can of course step up to be a leader and we know he's vocal and a good guy, but I'm guessing Fisher or Josi will get captain now. There's not a lot of other veterans on the team besides Rinne and Neal, Jackman and Ribero might (hopefully) be gone, and the rest are all pretty young or not known to be leaders. Most people around here are just very sad to see Weber go, he was our hero even though Josi arguably outplayed him this year (besides on the Power Play of course, load the Weber strat too strong). We're also losing a bit of grit. No one wanted to mess with Weber and he would stand up for the other guys.
Also I hate having to root for 2 Montreal players now, Weber and Price.
The thing with this trade is for the next 2 to 4 years its very likely to look like a total wash. Webber is still an elite Norris caliber defenseman and that will not change assuming he stays healthy. Same goes with Subban.
Its after that period that the trade starts looking like shit
On July 01 2016 02:26 Valiver wrote: Alright so after sleeping on it I guess I'm okay with the Weber Subban trade. The issue really isn't comparing the two in skill or in contract differences, as they are decently similar, the problem is we're losing the face of the franchise and captain. Subban can of course step up to be a leader and we know he's vocal and a good guy, but I'm guessing Fisher or Josi will get captain now. There's not a lot of other veterans on the team besides Rinne and Neal, Jackman and Ribero might (hopefully) be gone, and the rest are all pretty young or not known to be leaders. Most people around here are just very sad to see Weber go, he was our hero even though Josi arguably outplayed him this year (besides on the Power Play of course, load the Weber strat too strong). We're also losing a bit of grit. No one wanted to mess with Weber and he would stand up for the other guys.
Also I hate having to root for 2 Montreal players now, Weber and Price.
The thing with this trade is for the next 2 to 4 years its very likely to look like a total wash. Webber is still an elite Norris caliber defenseman and that will not change assuming he stays healthy. Same goes with Subban.
Its after that period that the trade starts looking like shit
I don't even know if it looks that great in the near future. Weber looked a bit slower than usual all season this year. Assuming he doesn't start regressing early/quickly sure the trade is a wash, but if he suddenly starts to plummet its going to be shit for both teams. The Habs because Weber is now theirs to deal with and if he retired early the Preds get some serious recapture penalties.
Also how the fucking hell does Rozival keep getting contracts from the Hawks. He's easily been the worst Dman for them for the last like 4 years and yet keeps getting resigned.
As a Hawks fan having watched basically every game in the last few years they would be far better off with some of their prospects then they would with Rozival. He's been at the point where he should be the 7th Dman to be there in case the rook you're trying to get NHL experience falters, but no they gave him 15 minutes a game in the playoffs. He's not someone that you should be giving that amount of time in a game unless its a blowout.
The terms for Lucic and Ladd are crazy. I can't see either of those guys being anywhere close to the production they have now near the end of those deals. TBL resigned Hedman for a steal of a deal though 8 years at 7.8 million per.
On July 02 2016 03:04 Kyhron wrote: The terms for Lucic and Ladd are crazy. I can't see either of those guys being anywhere close to the production they have now near the end of those deals. TBL resigned Hedman for a steal of a deal though 8 years at 7.8 million per.
LUcic will play with Mcdavid.
I think I could get 10 goals a year in the NHL on his wing. Just stand in front of the net and he'll do the work lol. So for a player like Lucic who can be a physical presence and score he should be able to get 25-30. Noones gonna take runs at him either with Lucic always on the ice. He's a pretty feared fighter.
On July 02 2016 03:04 Kyhron wrote: The terms for Lucic and Ladd are crazy. I can't see either of those guys being anywhere close to the production they have now near the end of those deals. TBL resigned Hedman for a steal of a deal though 8 years at 7.8 million per.
LUcic will play with Mcdavid.
I think I could get 10 goals a year in the NHL on his wing. Just stand in front of the net and he'll do the work lol. So for a player like Lucic who can be a physical presence and score he should be able to get 25-30. Noones gonna take runs at him either with Lucic always on the ice. He's a pretty feared fighter.
Yeah but the style of hockey he plays takes a huge toll on his body. I'm not questioning at all why they signed him I'm questioning the length. What happens in 4-5 years when Lucic starts to regress and can't keep up? Seems like there's a lot of teams banking on the cap to keep going up at a high rate with some of these signings
yeah that would be my concern with Lucic too. Well that, and Hall is roughly 100x better than him.
Chantal @pucksnlife #Habs Bergevin: "Today I was agressive. But some players flat out told me they don't want to play here, so there was no negociation."
yeah there are lots of off ice reasons to not wanna play there too. funny with all that is going on. there was another good one about ditching subban and taking on Radulov being like saying you're cutting carbs and buying a bread maker haha.
tbf, I think the Radulov gamble is smart and risk free though
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/O5NEPmV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PGrZGPU.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WviNemf.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vcyNjjy.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fYgl3Nr.gif)
that was embarassing. The Rangers d is so, so bad these days
![[image loading]](https://shawglobalnews.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/13350302_10154367874355809_2712467989411007358_o.jpg?quality=70&strip=all&w=1024&strip=all)
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1444577719/phil-kessel-all-star-001.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.rankopedia.com/CandidatePix/52165.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/CjKHoMm.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FhI5pk9.png)
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmJXQTYWEAA60dM.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/gSFrEUI.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmXiP7LVMAAlr9M.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmU18v5UIAE9Pjc.jpg)
