2000
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 6 games (3)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (6)Ottawa Senators™
2001
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 4 games
(2)Ottawa Senators™ vs. (7)Toronto Maple Leafs™
2002
Conference Semifinals(Second Round) in 7 games (4)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (7)Ottawa Senators™
2004
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 7 games (4)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (5)Ottawa Senators™
I still only see one "choke" (in 2001). In all the other series, I see an underdog taking the higher seeded (and thus favoured) team to a long series (with two going the distance) before losing.
There are too many people that drank the Toronto centered media kool-aid about how the scrappy Leafs overcame the highpowered Senators, but the Leafs were a better team according to the regular season.
And that series that the Senators "choked" was all about Yashin quitting on the team. When your alleged best player decides he doesn't want to do anything since he's received all the money from his contract, it's a tough thing to overcome.
I wouldn't neccessarily call it a choke job, but when you lose to a provincial rival in the playoffs 4 times in 5 years, right or wrong, it's hard not to cast judgement on the players involved.
In addition, there was an undeniable trickle down affect to those losses. As mentioned earlier, both the media and fans alike labeled the team as soft and management made it a point to try and correct this "problem" on the fly. Players like Ruutu, McGrattan, Donovon, Foligno, Smith, and Varada were either signed or drafted to try and compensate for this issue.
Ottawa was playing the Leafs the beloved of HNIC and 3/4 of the sports media.
No matter how it played out, the Leafs were the plucky little heroes.
Jacques Martin for the most part didn't want the team to retaliate and pick up penalties, but to take advantage of penalties called to the other team. Pat Quinn's great talent was playing the refs.
There wasn't enough money to bring in high powered help most of those years, the Leafs had one of the biggest payrolls in the league and the Sens one of the lowest.
Jacques Martin for the most part didn't want the team to retaliate and pick up penalties, but to take advantage of penalties called to the other team. Pat Quinn's great talent was playing the refs.
Not a bad strategy to adopt, especially when you have Cujo and Belfour bailing you out when the calls don't go your way. I don't think the better team won during that span, but the smarter team definitely did!
Missed the weekend games. Aside from having 1 goal now, any difference in performance?
i thought he looked better overall. more comfortable? he's back at center and was playing with petersson i think most of the time. thought petersson looked better too, so maybe that's a good combo they can work with.
Z got some more chances, one post i think at the beginning of last game that could have easily been his #2. He just needs to keep playing like that and they will start going in for sure.
I wouldn't neccessarily call it a choke job, but when you lose to a provincial rival in the playoffs 4 times in 5 years, right or wrong, it's hard not to cast judgement on the players involved.
In addition, there was an undeniable trickle down affect to those losses. As mentioned earlier, both the media and fans alike labeled the team as soft and management made it a point to try and correct this "problem" on the fly. Players like Ruutu, McGrattan, Donovon, Foligno, Smith, and Varada were either signed or drafted to try and compensate for this issue.
You specifically said dominated. We were dominated in a single series of the four. Perpetuating the myth that we were dominated by an underdog Leafs team just continues the cycle of ignorance.
The original point is really irrelevant to whether you believe we were dominated or not. The original point is simply false by its own right; player x was on a team that lost, therefore player x must suck. Hossa doesn't suck, and if Zibby pans out to be another Hossa, it'll be a huge win for the organization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flower
Not a bad strategy to adopt, especially when you have Cujo and Belfour bailing you out when the calls don't go your way. I don't think the better team won during that span, but the smarter team definitely did!
It wasn't a smart strategy because of their goalies, it was a smart strategy because refs are less likely to call penalties in the playoffs than in the regular season. The playoff mentality is 'let the players play'.
Either way, I think it's too simplistic and vague to attribute those losses to 'they were smarter than us'.
__________________ CanadianHockey________ __ __________Sens, Oilers, and Team Canada
Last edited by CanadianHockey: 11-20-2012 at 06:49 PM.
Ottawa was playing the Leafs the beloved of HNIC and 3/4 of the sports media.
...
Pat Quinn's great talent was playing the refs.
Most Definitely True! The reffing was slanted towards the Leafs.
Do I know??. Just ask an official who was there.
Kerry Fraser admitted this in his book the Final Call: My Life as an NHL Official. I remember reading this but cannot give you an exact quote.
Anyway...
Zibby is still really young. He's got plenty of time to get comfortable. And once he does, watch out!
If Zibby is the next Hossa then what are Silf, Stone, Lehner, and Ceci?
Eriksson, Benn, Lundqvist and Seabrook
Zibanejad = Forsberg (well poor man's Forsberg)
It will also be hard for Lehner to reach Lundqvist status but he has what it takes to get close to that
Silfverberg could be an Eriksson, even if a bit less productive
Same thing for Stone vs Benn
Ceci max potential would be Seabrook
More realistically, Zibanejad reminds me more of Rick Nash, a big strong body with good skating, a lot of skills and a great shot (even though if Nash skillset is a bit more high end), who can also put on a show with miraculous moves and score highlight reel goals. I know Nash is a very big name and always had a lot of hype around him but in terms of tangible results, I think Zibanejad could be a 30-30 guy too
Eriksson-Spezza-Nash
Michalek-Turris-Benn
Cowen-Karlsson
Wiercioch-Seabrook
Lundqvist
(but that'd be if everything turns right, which almost never happen
Ugh. No way I want any of our goalies compared in any way to Lundqvist. That guy is soft as a marshmallow mentally. If it wasn't for three quarters of the Rangers throwing themselves in front of every damned puck, he'd be worthless.
I'd be ecstatic to see Lehner as halfway between a Ron Hextall and Patrick Roy.
Ugh. No way I want any of our goalies compared in any way to Lundqvist. That guy is soft as a marshmallow mentally. If it wasn't for three quarters of the Rangers throwing themselves in front of every damned puck, he'd be worthless.
I'd be ecstatic to see Lehner as halfway between a Ron Hextall and Patrick Roy.
Not sure if serious... Lundqvist is probably the best goalie in the world actually... Not sure if there's another goalie who gives as many chances to win for his team in a season.
* I have watched tons of Rangers games over the years, not just 1 godamn series or something like that
EDIT : lol I didn't see the Hextall and Roy references... wow, Lundqvist wouldn't be good enough, Lehner needs to become something between a HOFer and a TOP-3 goalie in history?
You really need to put that sarcasm emoticon in those cases, you're pushing it way too hard
Ugh. No way I want any of our goalies compared in any way to Lundqvist. That guy is soft as a marshmallow mentally. If it wasn't for three quarters of the Rangers throwing themselves in front of every damned puck, he'd be worthless.
Not sure if serious... Lundqvist is probably the best goalie in the world actually... Not sure if there's another goalie who gives as many chances to win for his team in a season.
* I have watched tons of Rangers games over the years, not just 1 godamn series or something like that
I think Lundqvist is somewhat over rated, he is a excellent goalie but I dont think he is the best in the league. I would not be disappointed if Lehner turns out to be as good as Henrik.
You specifically said dominated. We were dominated in a single series of the four. Perpetuating the myth that we were dominated by an underdog Leafs team just continues the cycle of ignorance.
The original point is really irrelevant to whether you believe we were dominated or not. The original point is simply false by its own right; player x was on a team that lost, therefore player x must suck. Hossa doesn't suck, and if Zibby pans out to be another Hossa, it'll be a huge win for the organization.
It wasn't a smart strategy because of their goalies, it was a smart strategy because refs are less likely to call penalties in the playoffs than in the regular season. The playoff mentality is 'let the players play'.
Either way, I think it's too simplistic and vague to attribute those losses to 'they were smarter than us'.
Bud, we lost 4 straight playoff series to the Leafs. If that's not domination, I don't know what is? I wasn't breaking down each series individually. I was merely commenting on how our lack of playoff success against Toronto in the early 2000's caused many fans around here to lose faith in the leadership core. Rightly or wrongly, guys like Hossa, Yashin, Alfie, Redden, and even Jacques Martin were called into question.
Regarding your 2nd point, you're preaching to the choir here. I'm not sure how or where you picked up on me ripping on either Hossa or Zibby. I was actually arguing otherwise. I think Hossa is a stud and the raw skill set that Zibby possesses has me giddy with anticipation. Even as a teenager he owns a big league one timer and his size and skating ability make him an exciting prospect. With a little time, I fully expect him to put it all together and thrive in the NHL.
Lastly, concerning penalty calls in the playoffs, I agree with what you're saying here. For the most part, refs keep their whistles in their pockets during the playoffs, albeit mostly in the later rounds. So the Leafs strategy of getting an edge in the penalty call department was a well conceived plan. I was just adding that they had a good backup plan with both Cujo and the Eagle standing on their heads, in the event that the calls didn't go their way.
Thanks for the laugh.
