View Single Post
Old
07-20-2006, 10:39 PM
  #45
Vagrant
The Czech Condor
 
Vagrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 20,014
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vagrant
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Somehow I doubt there's a team in the league that could survive losing their top four defensemen. As it was, credit the Sabres for having enough depth to come within one goal of winning a playoff series despite it. Besides, holes in the blueline will also affect offense, especially in this new NHL where the transition game is so important.
Again, we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one. The window hasn't closed on Buffalo by any stretch and I would expect a good showing from them, but I really feel like Carolina was the best team in the East this year. Plus, it depends a lot on your definition of the best. If not for injuries, then Peter Forsberg is the best player in the league. If not for injuries, then Bobby Orr is the greatest hockey player of all time. Injuries are part of the game, and playing with them is part of the price that you pay. Kevyn Adams broke his hand on the first shift of the Finals Game 7 and still finished the game. I know, it's Game 7 of the Finals but there were a few defensemen for Buffalo that should have paid better attention to their bodies. Jay McKee and Teppo Numminen being among them. They played a reckless shot blocking style to get as far as they did, and in the end it came back and bit them. If you live by the sword you die by the sword. That isn't to say that they're "wrong" for blocking every shot, but there are times when you have to realize that you can't block every shot in every game and expect to stay healthy. You can't play at 110 mph like Buffalo did all playoffs long and not expect the injuries to come into play. Is that really the best team in the league? Or is that the best team while they're playing at a pace they can't possibly match over a 16 win playoff series?


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan
Oh, please, I was kidding. The Habs have had nigh on a hundred years to accumulate Cups. That alone gives them an insurmountable advantadge. With the parity of a cap world there will have to be something special before there's another dynasty.
No excuse, there are other teams that were around back then that don't have as many. Head start or no head start, anything over twenty championships is just sickly good. And please excuse my use of "parody", instead of "parity". Not sure where my head was with that spelling.

Vagrant is offline   Reply With Quote