HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk > Polls - (hockey-related only)
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2

Better team: Boston or San Jose?

View Poll Results: Who is the better team?
Boston Bruins, 25-5-4 46 17.10%
San Jose Sharks, 27-4-3 210 78.07%
Even 13 4.83%
Voters: 269. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-29-2008, 04:48 PM
  #101
Iwishihadacup
Registered User
 
Iwishihadacup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,713
vCash: 500
San Jose, they play in the harder conference

Iwishihadacup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2008, 05:43 PM
  #102
Luongo2008*
 
Luongo2008*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,870
vCash: 500
San Jose Sharks, 27-4-3

Luongo2008* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2008, 04:48 AM
  #103
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,668
vCash: 500
I've watched the Bruins a good deal with Center Ice and obviously watch every Sharks game. The Sharks team playing right now is not better than the Bruins team playing right now. The Sharks right now have been stagnant, a tad complacent, and turning the puck over way too much.

The Bruins are not doing any of those things. They don't have the depth in talent that the Sharks have. Tim Thomas is playing better than Nabokov but the track record of both goaltenders would lead one to believe that Nabby will end up with the better season.

As for whether or not points means you have the better season than another is debateable. Boston with the current group of players can all end up with more points than all the Sharks players for all I care, it doesn't mean they're the better offensive team. The teams are tougher in the West. Not because they are better but because they play tighter defensively, rougher on the body, and you have to battle a lot more in the West for a goal than in the East. Western teams definitely have their share of soft teams but the defense and goaltending from top to bottom is better in the West than the East and thus scoring is tougher to accomplish.

If the Sharks and Bruins are equal on the point sheet, it will be equally impressive in my eyes because on paper, I believe the Bruins to be less talented up and down their lineup than the Sharks. The Sharks number would be impressive because by the end of the year they will travel more than any other team in the NHL. Even players tell you that it has an effect so to deny that it does is just plain ignorance. Is it a tangible effect that you can put a precise number on? No. But it is there and to not acknowledge it is to be flat out wrong.

Bruins are better right now. Over the course of the season so far, the Sharks have had to deal with a couple injuries, Nabby being the most key of them, and they still pulled through. Going off the teams each have played so far, I'd say the Sharks have had a slightly tougher schedule with a tougher travel schedule. Outside of October, the Bruins travel schedule has been pretty light. The Sharks schedule is a little more spread out but a lot more miles even with more home games.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2008, 06:10 PM
  #104
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I've watched the Bruins a good deal with Center Ice and obviously watch every Sharks game. The Sharks team playing right now is not better than the Bruins team playing right now. The Sharks right now have been stagnant, a tad complacent, and turning the puck over way too much.

The Bruins are not doing any of those things. They don't have the depth in talent that the Sharks have. Tim Thomas is playing better than Nabokov but the track record of both goaltenders would lead one to believe that Nabby will end up with the better season.

As for whether or not points means you have the better season than another is debateable. Boston with the current group of players can all end up with more points than all the Sharks players for all I care, it doesn't mean they're the better offensive team. The teams are tougher in the West. Not because they are better but because they play tighter defensively, rougher on the body, and you have to battle a lot more in the West for a goal than in the East. Western teams definitely have their share of soft teams but the defense and goaltending from top to bottom is better in the West than the East and thus scoring is tougher to accomplish.

If the Sharks and Bruins are equal on the point sheet, it will be equally impressive in my eyes because on paper, I believe the Bruins to be less talented up and down their lineup than the Sharks. The Sharks number would be impressive because by the end of the year they will travel more than any other team in the NHL. Even players tell you that it has an effect so to deny that it does is just plain ignorance. Is it a tangible effect that you can put a precise number on? No. But it is there and to not acknowledge it is to be flat out wrong.

Bruins are better right now. Over the course of the season so far, the Sharks have had to deal with a couple injuries, Nabby being the most key of them, and they still pulled through. Going off the teams each have played so far, I'd say the Sharks have had a slightly tougher schedule with a tougher travel schedule. Outside of October, the Bruins travel schedule has been pretty light. The Sharks schedule is a little more spread out but a lot more miles even with more home games.
You bring up some interesting points, some I agree with and some I don't. I'll take them 1 at a time.

1) Actually, I think the B's have come back from the break a little stagnant too. They played a poor game on Saturday with little energy and were pretty dead for most of the game on Sunday. The Savard-Kessel-Lucic line was almost invisible on Sat, but looked a bit better on Sunday. Kessel looked really out of sorts for a bit, but hopefully that goal on Sunday woke him up.

2) I completely disagree about depth of talent. I know SJ recently changed their lines a bit, but let's look at it like this:

Marleau-Thornton-Setoguch v. Lucic-Savard-Kessel that's pretty darn close imo, but I'll give the edge to SJ there

Clowe-Pavelski-Michalek v. Wheeler-Krejci-Ryder I call that one in Boston's favor, but I really do like Pavelski

Grier-Plihal-Cheechoo v. Sturm-Bergeron-Kobasew again I think Boston has the edge

Shelley-Goc-Roenick v. Axelsson-Yelle-Thornton call that one a draw imo

Really I'd say it's Boston who has the more depth as SJ really doesn't get as much scoring from their 3rd and 4th lines as Boston.

I'll give the edge to SJ in defensemen as I said earlier.

3) It's interesting that you say the western conference plays more physical hockey. According to NHL.com both conferences have 5 teams in the top 10 in hits, but the eastern has 9 of the top 15 teams in hits. The western conf. does have 4 of the top 5 in fighting majors, but I'm not sure if that's what you meant or not. I think the west does have better teams in general, and this is especially true when you get to the last place teams. The west. last place teams are pretty good, the east.'s just stink.

4) I'm sorry, but I'm just not buying this "SJ has it tough because of travel" theory. Again, I've never seen any evidence that western teams are at a disadvantage with this. It didn't stop Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, LA, and Anaheim from making it to the finals in different years. Yes it SEEMS like it should be a handicap, but there's no real evidence of it, and the effect, if there is one, is pretty minor imo. Some players might complain about it, but I highly doubt if you asked the Sharks players if they feel at a disadvantage because of travel, they'd deny it. Also, there are other things players say are factors... such as locker facilities and practice facilities. Do we start to look at those too when comparing teams? How about media scrutiny? Media expectations? You can go on forever and ever looking at these pretty ambiguous and minor issues.

In my opinion the best team usually ends up with the best record. I expect that will be SJ at the end of the year
.

5) Finally, the injury issue. Again, I don't think this should be used by either team. If SJ is as deep as you claim, the injuries shouldn't be a factor. They've really not had any significant injury, other than Mitchell, and I don't really think that's too crippling, especially compared to losing 2 of your top 4 dmen, your top scoring LW, and your top returning scoring RW, and possibly your best all around C. Again, I'm not using injuries as an excuse. The B's don't have it any harder than most teams. That's hockey. The fact that they plugged in Hunwick (compare his numbers to Erhoff) and the fact that they had Vlad Sobotka in Providence only speaks to their depth of talent.

Dr Quincy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2008, 09:13 PM
  #105
mytor4*
 
mytor4*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,175
vCash: 500
WOW After Bostons win tonight against the Pens i hate to but got to say they seem like the best team in the league as we speak. Right now they have all the pieces to go all the way.This comming from a Habs fan.

mytor4* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 12:00 AM
  #106
Montreal Shadow
Registered User
 
Montreal Shadow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iwishihadacup View Post
San Jose, they play in the harder conference
San Jose makes things harder for the rest of its conference, not the other way around.

Look at how Boston is doing, they would stomp on San Jose as they are right now. Sorry but Boston is by far the best team in the league as of now, there is simply no contest even coming from San Jose.

Montreal Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 12:04 AM
  #107
Wedontneedroads
Registered User
 
Wedontneedroads's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 2,885
vCash: 500
i went with the homer pick on this one, but i definitely need to start watching boston games especially after the result tonight that i did watch.

for some reason I just can't believe tomas can keep up this pace all season long. whenever i watch him i can't believe he is an nhl goalie because his style is unlike any other goalie's. reminds me a bit of hasek how he is all over the ice sometimes. he is making it work, and if he stays consistant and the sharks are in fact for real this year we may find out who is better in the post season...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montreal Shadow View Post
San Jose makes things harder for the rest of its conference, not the other way around.

Look at how Boston is doing, they would stomp on San Jose as they are right now. Sorry but Boston is by far the best team in the league as of now, there is simply no contest even coming from San Jose.
So SJ playing teamsthat are as jacked as they will be for a regular season game because they are playing the best team in the Western Conference doesn't make things hard on the sharks? silly logic there my friend. SJ and Boston get just about every teams best game which makes what they are doing even more impressive. saying one would stomp the other or that one is by far better than the other is a bit of a stretch...


Last edited by Wedontneedroads: 12-31-2008 at 12:09 AM.
Wedontneedroads is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 12:58 AM
  #108
zeke
#freewilly
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 28,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
The Bruins are not doing any of those things. They don't have the depth in talent that the Sharks have. Tim Thomas is playing better than Nabokov but the track record of both goaltenders would lead one to believe that Nabby will end up with the better season.
well, actually, Thomas has the better track record.

Since Lockout

Thomas (34): 182gms, .916sv%
Nabokov (33): 198gms, .905sv%

He's a better goalie than Nabby.

zeke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 02:30 AM
  #109
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 18,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke View Post
well, actually, Thomas has the better track record.

Since Lockout

Thomas (34): 182gms, .916sv%
Nabokov (33): 198gms, .905sv%

He's a better goalie than Nabby.
Yeah because 89W's/ 10 SO/ 3 Playoff wins>>228 W's/ 42 SO/ 30 Playoff wins.

Better track record

Clowe Me is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 02:51 AM
  #110
RoadDoggFL
Registered User
 
RoadDoggFL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Washington, D.C.
Country: Colombia
Posts: 4,804
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to RoadDoggFL Send a message via Yahoo to RoadDoggFL
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcticSharkie View Post
Yeah because 89W's/ 10 SO/ 3 Playoff wins>>228 W's/ 42 SO/ 30 Playoff wins.

Better track record
How many GWGs did he net, again?

Why to people attribute team accomplishments to goalies...?

RoadDoggFL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 09:53 AM
  #111
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke View Post
well, actually, Thomas has the better track record.

Since Lockout

Thomas (34): 182gms, .916sv%
Nabokov (33): 198gms, .905sv%

He's a better goalie than Nabby.
lol the misguided myth of save percentage being the indicator of better goaltending. Tim Thomas finished 4th last year with .921 save percentage and yet it was Evgeni Nabokov who finished runner-up in the Vezina voting. I wonder why that is...

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 11:36 AM
  #112
Wedontneedroads
Registered User
 
Wedontneedroads's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 2,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadDoggFL View Post
How many GWGs did he net, again?

Why to people attribute team accomplishments to goalies...?
i'm sure we could go through and count how many game saving saves nabby made last year if you really want to see how many games he saved for the sharks. you simply have to watch the games to see how nabby held us in games last year when we struggled in the second half of the third. I have not watched enough of thomas this year, but i'm sure he has saved some games for the bruins as well. Every goalie stat is a team stat brosef so if we are throwing out all team stats then we have absolutely nothing to judge players on.

Wedontneedroads is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 11:39 AM
  #113
Shwag33
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
lol the misguided myth of save percentage being the indicator of better goaltending. Tim Thomas finished 4th last year with .921 save percentage and yet it was Evgeni Nabokov who finished runner-up in the Vezina voting. I wonder why that is...


Really its because of how his team did infront of him.


Save percentage is the only consistant thing you can rate between goalies. I know the quality of shots can vary, but you would think playing on a worse team the more quality shots he would have had to face.

Shwag33 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 11:40 AM
  #114
zeke
#freewilly
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 28,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
lol the misguided myth of save percentage being the indicator of better goaltending. Tim Thomas finished 4th last year with .921 save percentage and yet it was Evgeni Nabokov who finished runner-up in the Vezina voting. I wonder why that is...
the myth here would be that vezina-trophy voting means anything.

it doesn't.

save percentage is far and away the best goaltending indicator. nothing else comes close.

Vezina voting is pretty much entirely based on Wins and GAA - both team stats that goalies have little control over. They have no control over how good the team is in front of them, and they have no control over how many shots the team in front of them gives up.

the only thing they have control over is how many saves they make.

zeke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 12:07 PM
  #115
zeke
#freewilly
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 28,932
vCash: 500
I mean, sharks fans keep saying that he means so much to the team, but reality paints a different picture:

2008/09

With Nabby: 107-59-22 (188gms, 236pts - 103pt pace)
W/O Nabby: 65-21-8 (94gms, 138pts - 120pt pace)
W/Toskala: 49-17-5 (71gms, 103pts - 119pt pace)
W/Boucher: 11-2-2 (15gms, 22pts - 120pt pace)
W/Schaefer: 5-1-0 (6gms, 10pts - 137pt pace)
W/Greiss: 0-1-1 (2gms, 1pts - 41pt pace)




He doesn't seem to be as much a factor as some fans like to think.

Meanwhile, here's how Thomas compares to his goaltending mates in Boston since the lockout:

With Thomas: 86-64-23 (173gms, 195pts - 92pt pace)
W/O Thomas: 47-48-15 (110gms, 109pts - 81pt pace)
Toivenen: 12-14-5 (31gms, 29pts - 77pt pace)
Raycroft: 8-19-2 (29gms, 18pts - 51pt pace)
Auld: 9-7-5 (21gms, 23pts - 90pt pace)
Fernandez: 14-4-1 (19gms, 29pts - 125pt pace)
McDonald: 2-2-1 (5gms, 5pts - 82pt pace)
Rask: 2-1-1 (4gms, 5pts - 103pt pace)
Finley: 0-1-0 (1gms, 0pts - 0pt pace)

zeke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 12:52 PM
  #116
likewall32
**putt meem hear**
 
likewall32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke View Post
I mean, sharks fans keep saying that he means so much to the team, but reality paints a different picture:

2008/09

With Nabby: 107-59-22 (188gms, 236pts - 103pt pace)
W/O Nabby: 65-21-8 (94gms, 138pts - 120pt pace)
W/Toskala: 49-17-5 (71gms, 103pts - 119pt pace)
W/Boucher: 11-2-2 (15gms, 22pts - 120pt pace)
W/Schaefer: 5-1-0 (6gms, 10pts - 137pt pace)
W/Greiss: 0-1-1 (2gms, 1pts - 41pt pace)




He doesn't seem to be as much a factor as some fans like to think.

Congratulations, you've manipulated the numbers to show that the Sharks would do better with Nolan Schaefer in net rather than Evgeni Nabokov.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why statistics don't tell the entire story.

likewall32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:11 PM
  #117
RoadDoggFL
Registered User
 
RoadDoggFL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Washington, D.C.
Country: Colombia
Posts: 4,804
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to RoadDoggFL Send a message via Yahoo to RoadDoggFL
Quote:
Originally Posted by likewall32 View Post

Congratulations, you've manipulated the numbers to show that the Sharks would do better with Nolan Schaefer in net rather than Evgeni Nabokov.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why statistics don't tell the entire story.
How dare he use such obscure stats as wins and points to prove his point.

Those stats are only allowed to be used in singing praises for overrated goalies.

To be fair, the "W/O Nabby" column was against weaker teams, but it's still telling.

RoadDoggFL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:36 PM
  #118
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by likewall32 View Post

Congratulations, you've manipulated the numbers to show that the Sharks would do better with Nolan Schaefer in net rather than Evgeni Nabokov.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why statistics don't tell the entire story.
Way to completely miss the point. Of course Schaefer's teeny sample means absolutely nothing. But you totally ignore the 94 non-Nabokov games which is certainly enough of a sample to look at. The numbers pretty much show that even mediocore goalies are going to get wins when they play for a very good team, which is why wins (which is the stat Sharks fans love to use when talking about Nabokov) are meaningless when used to judge goalies.

You've actually refuted your own argument. Yes... even Nolan Schaefer can win with Thornton, Marleau, Michalek, et al playing in front of him, which is why any rational person looks at stats other than wins when judging goalies.

Dr Quincy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:37 PM
  #119
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadDoggFL View Post
How dare he use such obscure stats as wins and points to prove his point.

Those stats are only allowed to be used in singing praises for overrated goalies.

To be fair, the "W/O Nabby" column was against weaker teams, but it's still telling.
That is a good point, and one that I didn't think of. It's true the back up will end up playing against poorer teams more often. But I think you are right, the overall point stands.

Dr Quincy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:45 PM
  #120
likewall32
**putt meem hear**
 
likewall32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadDoggFL View Post
How dare he use such obscure stats as wins and points to prove his point.

Those stats are only allowed to be used in singing praises for overrated goalies.

To be fair, the "W/O Nabby" column was against weaker teams, but it's still telling.
Toskala had better stats in San Jose, how's he done since?
Schaefer had better stats in San Jose, how's he done since?
Kipprusoff had worse stats in San Jose, and how's he done since?

As you pointed out with your last statement, without proper context, statistics are entirely useless. If you think any stat that has Brian Boucher better than Evgeni Nabokov is telling, then I really can't help you.

Put down the stat sheets and watch a few Sharks games and then tell me Brian Boucher is better than Evgeni Nabokov, that's the only real way to judge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Quincy View Post
Way to completely miss the point. Of course Schaefer's teeny sample means absolutely nothing. But you totally ignore the 94 non-Nabokov games which is certainly enough of a sample to look at. The numbers pretty much show that even mediocore goalies are going to get wins when they play for a very good team, which is why wins (which is the stat Sharks fans love to use when talking about Nabokov) are meaningless when used to judge goalies.

You've actually refuted your own argument. Yes... even Nolan Schaefer can win with Thornton, Marleau, Michalek, et al playing in front of him, which is why any rational person looks at stats other than wins when judging goalies.
Since this is my argument as well, why exactly are you trying to refute me?

My argument doesn't involve arbitrary numbers, so, no, I haven't refuted my own point. My argument involves on ice production, which numbers can reflect to some degree, but not entirely. Look at the upper part of my post where I answer RoadDogg, and you can see what I'm arguing, and how the last part of your post agrees with my point of view.

You go on and continue to think Nabokov is a mediocre goalie... you just go on and continue to think that.

likewall32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:46 PM
  #121
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by likewall32 View Post
Toskala had better stats in San Jose, how's he done since?
Schaefer had better stats in San Jose, how's he done since?
Kipprusoff had worse stats in San Jose, and how's he done since?

As you pointed out with your last statement, without proper context, statistics are entirely useless. If you think any stat that has Brian Boucher better than Evgeni Nabokov is telling, then I really can't help you.

Put down the stat sheets and watch a few Sharks games and then tell me Brian Boucher is better than Evgeni Nabokov, that's the only real way to judge.
Toskala hasn't done as well in Toronto as he did in SJ because he plays for a worse team. Is this really that hard?

Dr Quincy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:47 PM
  #122
Dr Quincy
Registered User
 
Dr Quincy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by likewall32 View Post
You go on and continue to think Nabokov is a mediocre goalie... you just go on and continue to think that.
I believe I said he was a top 10, but not top 5, goalie. Is that really mediocore?

Dr Quincy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:47 PM
  #123
ranold26
The real Gahden
 
ranold26's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,362
vCash: 500
Montreal

ranold26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:56 PM
  #124
likewall32
**putt meem hear**
 
likewall32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Quincy View Post
I believe I said he was a top 10, but not top 5, goalie. Is that really mediocore?
I'd disagree that he's not in the Top 5, but that's besides the point here.

I'm just using the words you used in this post (if you're not calling him mediocre, then I apologize for my poor reading comprehension):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Quincy View Post
The numbers pretty much show that even mediocore goalies are going to get wins when they play for a very good team, which is why wins (which is the stat Sharks fans love to use when talking about Nabokov) are meaningless when used to judge goalies.


Last edited by likewall32: 12-31-2008 at 02:02 PM.
likewall32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2008, 01:58 PM
  #125
Clock
Moderator
 
Clock's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 20,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheektovanek View Post
Well?
The poll is going to be horrendously skewed in favor of the Sharks because of the heated Habs rivalry, but yeah, the Sharks. But not by a lot.

Clock is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:46 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.