HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

[Puck Daddy] The 10 biggest hockey upsets of the last decade (Oilers #2)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-10-2009, 03:14 PM
  #26
Beerfish
Registered User
 
Beerfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giant Moo View Post
We've all purged Tommy Salo from our memories using drinking. Lots of drinking.
People forget that despite him going down hill fast his last year or so he was the Oilers best player for a couple of years. A quality starting tender he was for the most part. Playoffs in 4 out of 6 years for us including going 8-2-2 the year we got him. He had GAA of 2.31, 2.33, 2.46, 2.22 his 1st four years for us.

He imploded badly but was way better than he was given credit for most of the years he was here.

Beerfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 03:28 PM
  #27
Section337
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 4,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer View Post
I was referring to the Red Wings team before the previous two seasons. Consistently being at the top of the league every season and then failing to advance in the playoffs is choking.
I don't know if it is choking so much as being a team that has not played a meaningful game for weeks versus a team who has been in playoff mode during that same period.

Section337 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 03:29 PM
  #28
Reimer
Tambo Troll Face
 
Reimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Section337 View Post
I don't know if it is choking so much as being a team that has not played a meaningful game for weeks versus a team who has been in playoff mode during that same period.
I'm pretty sure that is the definition of choking. Regardless of how much rest you have had, they are all professionals and were clearly the better team. They should have been able to consistently win.

If you want I can look at it at the flip side and say Detriot was rested while their opponents should have been tired.

Reimer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 03:33 PM
  #29
LoudmouthHemskyfan#1
Registered User
 
LoudmouthHemskyfan#1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: E-town
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,645
vCash: 500
As soon as I heard Legace talk about how all the pressure was on him, it wasn't going to be an upset anymore.

LoudmouthHemskyfan#1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 03:33 PM
  #30
JBell84
Registered User
 
JBell84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CGY-body, EDM-spirit
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,655
vCash: 500
Now I've seen everything, Detroit a team of chokers. I guess every team that isn't a dynasty chokes.

Ah well, at least they have something to choke on.

JBell84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 03:39 PM
  #31
Lessy
Registered User
 
Lessy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,413
vCash: 500
There's no way that 06 first round upset is the biggest one in the NHL in the past decade. That Oilers team was borderline dominant all year, just with zero goaltending. Put a hot goaltender on a very good team to begin with and it's not exactly your typical 8 seed. And that's not even mentioning the fact that that team was built for the playoffs. You'd be hard pressed to find a grittier team in the past decade than the 06 Oilers. That is what a team that wins in May looks like.

As for the whole Wings choking thing, I'm not sure I buy it. They've won enough cups to avoid that label. They haven't exactly been the grittiest team and sometimes you can't win based on skill alone in the playoffs like you can in the season. The games are a lot tighter and there's far more physicality. Add in some sketchy goaltending and you have a team that's not always going to dominate the postseason like they do the regular season.

Lessy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 04:03 PM
  #32
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer View Post
I was referring to the Red Wings team before the previous two seasons. Consistently being at the top of the league every season and then failing to advance in the playoffs is choking.

Is someone gonna come out and say that San Jose are not chokers because they have been at the top of the standings consistently for the last 5 years or so?
How many cups has San Jose won in the last ten years?

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 04:20 PM
  #33
Mentallydull
Registered User
 
Mentallydull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Despite their cup wins, they definitely did choke for a couple years, Calgary style.
2008-2009 - Stanley Cup Finals
2007-2008 - Stanley Cup Champions
2006-2007 - Conference Finals
2005-2006 - Conference Quarter-Finals
2003-2004 - Conference Semi-Finals
2002-2003 - Conferece Quarter-Finals
2001-2002 - Stanley Cup Champions
2000-2001 - Conference Quarter-Finals
etc. etc.

I don't know, making the playoffs 18 years in a row hardly seems like a team that chokes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer View Post
I was referring to the Red Wings team before the previous two seasons. Consistently being at the top of the league every season and then failing to advance in the playoffs is choking.

Is someone gonna come out and say that San Jose are not chokers because they have been at the top of the standings consistently for the last 5 years or so?
You said they "constantly" choke. If you said they choke now and then, like every team in the league, then I'd agree with you.

To label them chokers because they don't win every playoff series is pretty far-fetched though.


Last edited by Mentallydull: 11-10-2009 at 04:26 PM.
Mentallydull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 04:23 PM
  #34
Section337
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 4,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer View Post
I'm pretty sure that is the definition of choking. Regardless of how much rest you have had, they are all professionals and were clearly the better team. They should have been able to consistently win.

If you want I can look at it at the flip side and say Detriot was rested while their opponents should have been tired.
That's not my definition of a choke, it is an underdog winning. For me, a choke requires the loss of a lead and not just any lead. Examples where I am more likely to see a choke is a team losing a series where they are up 3-0 or 3-1 with 2 of the next 3 games at home.

Section337 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 04:26 PM
  #35
Giant Moo
Registered User
 
Giant Moo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer View Post
Don't hate the palyer hate the game. The Yankees are the most successful franchise in the MLB and up until this year they were easily labelled as chokers.
I don't get it. Detroit has won a metric shiat-tonne of Cups the last few years. They are by no accepted definition of the word "chokers".

Giant Moo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 04:26 PM
  #36
Giant Moo
Registered User
 
Giant Moo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
People forget that despite him going down hill fast his last year or so he was the Oilers best player for a couple of years. A quality starting tender he was for the most part. Playoffs in 4 out of 6 years for us including going 8-2-2 the year we got him. He had GAA of 2.31, 2.33, 2.46, 2.22 his 1st four years for us.

He imploded badly but was way better than he was given credit for most of the years he was here.
I absolutely loved Tommy Salo pre-meltdown. But the fact is he wasn't very good in his last while here. Almost terrible.

Giant Moo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 04:32 PM
  #37
BlueBelle
Registered User
 
BlueBelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in a C of annoying
Posts: 7,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
How many cups has San Jose won in the last ten years?
What!? They've won a cup?

BlueBelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 05:07 PM
  #38
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBelle View Post
What!? They've won a cup?
Just a rumour. DSF 3

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 05:15 PM
  #39
NJD Jester
Registered User
 
NJD Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to NJD Jester
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lessy View Post
That Oilers team was borderline dominant all year, just with zero goaltending. Put a hot goaltender on a very good team to begin with and it's not exactly your typical 8 seed.
Yeah! And give'em Jagr, they win the President's Trophy, see?!

They were an eight seed. They were not "borderline dominant."

The monkey even picked the Wings.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?fid=2288

NJD Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 05:49 PM
  #40
Soundwave
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,237
vCash: 500
I had a feeling we would beat Detroit that year, even though a lot of people thought I was nuts.

We played them pretty even in the regular season that year as I recall.

I think the key was weathering that initial barrage you knew that was coming and getting a split after the first first two games. We hung tough the first game and had a shot to win even though we were badly outshot. Once we had game 2, and then seeing Rexall turn into a completely different place come game 3 ... I knew it was on.

To the Wings credit, after that series, I think they got tougher. Calgary tried to intimidate them in the 07 playoffs physically and they just got schooled by the Red Wings. Too bad they couldn't beat Anaheim that year.

Still I remember watching game 6 and it was somewhat surreal to see the Wings just implode (or us explode) like that. That last goal was in like slow motion, I saw Samsonov get open and knew what was coming ... just awesome.

Soundwave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 05:51 PM
  #41
VincenzosOil
Registered User
 
VincenzosOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mentallydull View Post
2008-2009 - Stanley Cup Finals
2007-2008 - Stanley Cup Champions
2006-2007 - Conference Finals
2005-2006 - Conference Quarter-Finals
2003-2004 - Conference Semi-Finals
2002-2003 - Conferece Quarter-Finals
2001-2002 - Stanley Cup Champions
2000-2001 - Conference Quarter-Finals
etc. etc.

I don't know, making the playoffs 18 years in a row hardly seems like a team that chokes.



You said they "constantly" choke. If you said they choke now and then, like every team in the league, then I'd agree with you.

To label them chokers because they don't win every playoff series is pretty far-fetched though.
I don't understand how people could label the Red Wings chokers.

If anything, their apparent lack of cup wins in this 10 year stretch makes the Islanders run of 4, on the heels of Montreal's run of 5?, that more remarkable. Even the Oilers 4 of 5 was an acheivement of legendary proportions. Would you call the Oilers loss to the Flames in 86 (Smith own goal) a choke?

The Wings are a winning, model organization and have been for almost 2 decades. They were/are what the current Oilers aspire to be. But they have never been and never will be the equivalent of those dynasty teams, imo. They have won 2 cups in the last 10 yrs and have always been competitive in the Stanley Cup runs. Chokers they are not. They win consistently, always near the top of the standings and how many teams over the years have been put in the position of the Wings, always the top seed, always prey to upsets?

You're that good for that long the odds catch up with you once in a while and you lose a few rounds to teams that you would normally beat.

VincenzosOil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 05:54 PM
  #42
Soundwave
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,237
vCash: 500
They rebounded from a few upsets to come back and win the Cup in 08 and Datsyuk and Zetterberg shed the label of playoff no-shows ... so no, they're not chokers. If they were getting that rep, they bounced back strong the last few years.

Hockey unlike say basketball, I think is an upset prone type of sport because you can have a great team but if you run into a red hot goalie and catch a few bad bounces ... suddenly you can find yourself in *a lot* of trouble.

The Sharks are true chokers.

Soundwave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 05:56 PM
  #43
Lessy
Registered User
 
Lessy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJD Jester View Post
Yeah! And give'em Jagr, they win the President's Trophy, see?!

They were an eight seed. They were not "borderline dominant."

The monkey even picked the Wings.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?fid=2288
Perhaps dominant wasn't the right word. Quite possibly the best 8 seed of all time though. We regularly outshot and outplayed opponents during that season with zero goaltending being the reason we were the 8 seed. We were the second best faceoff team and allowed the fewest shots on goal in the entire NHL that season. Combine that with specialty teams group that was top 10 in the league and that wasn't a typical 8th seeded team during the year.

Lessy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 06:02 PM
  #44
VincenzosOil
Registered User
 
VincenzosOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundwave View Post
They rebounded from a few upsets to come back and win the Cup in 08 and Datsyuk and Zetterberg shed the label of playoff no-shows ... so no, they're not chokers. If they were getting that rep, they bounced back strong the last few years.

Hockey unlike say basketball, I think is an upset prone type of sport because you can have a great team but if you run into a red hot goalie and catch a few bad bounces ... suddenly you can find yourself in *a lot* of trouble.

The Sharks are true chokers.
Yeah, agreed on the Sharks. The Wings have the hardware of proof.

I don't watch basketball much but do they have 4 rounds of playoffs?

You also have consider 16 of 30 teams make the dance but that ratio is certainly better than the 16 of 21 years ago.

VincenzosOil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 06:05 PM
  #45
Stoneman89
Registered User
 
Stoneman89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,037
vCash: 500
If your a team that constantly and consistently finishes at or near the top every year for 15 years, you'll probably have your fair share of great victories (cups), and some upsets. That's Detroit.

Stoneman89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 06:18 PM
  #46
oiler-dude
Registered User
 
oiler-dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,013
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJD Jester View Post
Yeah! And give'em Jagr, they win the President's Trophy, see?!

They were an eight seed. They were not "borderline dominant."

The monkey even picked the Wings.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?fid=2288
Thanks for proving you didn't watch the Oilers that season.

oiler-dude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 06:24 PM
  #47
Soundwave
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,237
vCash: 500


I haven't seen this in a while, funny how many things come rushing back, like those kids going nuts by the glass after the 1st goal and the video review judge guy who had to wear ear plugs because he couldn't take the noise

Soundwave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 06:44 PM
  #48
Perfect_Drug
Registered User
 
Perfect_Drug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,067
vCash: 500
That Edmonton-Detroit upset wasn't that big of an upset. LOOK at that lineup.

Deadline acquisitions of Spacek, Samsonov, Tarnstrom, and Roloson put us over the edge. We were NOT a bubble team at that point.

Not to mention, Detroit's stats were padded because of such a ridiculousy weak division.


Dallas-Edmonton was a HUGE upset. They were even talking about Andy Moog's crawling up the career shutout list, and playoff series wins, when there were 2 mins left in the game.


Why isn't Miracle on Ice on that list?


And in 1991, the Minnesota North Stars Beat the #1 team in the league (Chicago), #2 team (STL), and defending Stanley Cup Champs (EDM) to get to the finals (losing to Pittsburgh).

One of those should have made the list.

Perfect_Drug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 06:53 PM
  #49
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,567
vCash: 500
There is no universal definiton of the word "choke" as it pertains to sports, so everyone is free to interpret it how they like. IMO the Red Wings were a bunch of soft chokers in the middle of the decade. Datsyuk and Zetterberg figured it out (the league changing to rules to phase toughness out of the game certainly helped as well), they won a Cup, and thus they're no longer the chokers they used to be.

The Ducks and Kings beating the Wings early in the decade were both bigger upsets than the Oilers doing it. As it's been said, that Oilers team was almost certainly the best #8 seed of all time. They found themselves in 8th place due to terrible goaltending all year (even Roloson stunk the joint out until the playoffs for the most part), and the pathetic efforts they mailed in time and again down the stretch. They were tanking to get MacT fired in my estimation, and ended up backing into the playoffs because Vancouver tanked a little harder to get Crawford fired. When they found themselves in the playoffs afterall, they flipped the switch back to "ON" and went from there. Given a typical year, that team would finish no worse than 3rd in the conference. The Detroit team they beat was a bunch of pansies who hadn't yet learned you need to leave your purse at home in the spring time. Edmonton simply delivered the final chapter of that lesson.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2009, 07:10 PM
  #50
Jimmi Jenkins
Always the Bards
 
Jimmi Jenkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 38,550
vCash: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfect_Drug View Post
That Edmonton-Detroit upset wasn't that big of an upset. LOOK at that lineup.

Deadline acquisitions of Spacek, Samsonov, Tarnstrom, and Roloson put us over the edge. We were NOT a bubble team at that point.

Not to mention, Detroit's stats were padded because of such a ridiculousy weak division.


Dallas-Edmonton was a HUGE upset. They were even talking about Andy Moog's crawling up the career shutout list, and playoff series wins, when there were 2 mins left in the game.


Why isn't Miracle on Ice on that list?


And in 1991, the Minnesota North Stars Beat the #1 team in the league (Chicago), #2 team (STL), and defending Stanley Cup Champs (EDM) to get to the finals (losing to Pittsburgh).

One of those should have made the list.
It's of the last Decade

Jimmi Jenkins 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 11:26 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.