HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Miscellaneous NHL Talk Part VIII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-26-2013, 08:25 PM
  #501
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
No. There would be a riot and rightfully so.

Truth is we could buyout Meszaros or bury him or even trade a 2nd with him to dump him. All are much more viable options than trading Gus.
Eh, I think Gus is overrated around here. I'd rather trade Mez, but in the future (even if not this season), if Gus get's dealt I won't be too broken up about it.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-26-2013, 08:40 PM
  #502
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,175
vCash: 500
Evgeny Kuznetsov is already claiming he'll probably head back to the KHL like Kovalchuk did when he's 30.

Kuznetsov's set to be playing in the NHL in 2014-2015 when his current KHL deal runs up if he ever comes over. He'll be 22 when the deal runs up.

This is one reason I'm somewhat glad we rarely draft Russians. There's too much baggage with a lot of them.

LegionOfDoom91 is online now  
Old
07-26-2013, 09:02 PM
  #503
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Eh, I think Gus is overrated around here. I'd rather trade Mez, but in the future (even if not this season), if Gus get's dealt I won't be too broken up about it.
Cheap, capable top 4 defensemen are at a premium.

Trading them, especially one that fits our biggest need, is beyond stupid if it means keeping a 27-year-old glass defenseman on a lucrative pay grade.

Just losing Gustafsson isn't a huge blow, it's the context and the relative stupidity surrounding it, especially when he has shown all the signs without being given the opportunity to prove he could a huge contributor.

You should be absolutely pissed if something like what was suggested actually occurs.

CS is offline  
Old
07-26-2013, 09:09 PM
  #504
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,302
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
I didn't say "the offense" needed to be better. Richards, Carter, and Gagne needed to be better. To win the Cup, everyone has to show up. Goaltending was an issue, but there is no argument that you can make to tell me that if Richards, Carter, and Gagne had produced more offensively that it would not have had the same impact as improved goaltending.

Like I said, 3/4 losses were one goal games. Richards had 21 points in the first three series. Carter had 5 points (in the six games he played in). Gagne had 10 points in the first three series. In the Cup Finals they scored a COMBINED 6 points and were a -21. It defies logic to argue that you would say that improved offensive play from these three would not have had the same impact as better goaltending in three one goal games.
They played fine. You know who didn't play fine? Leighton. Asking them to play better is just absurd. Asking the guy who downright sucked in every possible way to just suck a little less makes a lot more sense.

Scoring goals: Minor, minimal issue. Nonissue, actually. The team as a whole scored enough, and those guys you called out were still very good defensively.

Goalkeeping: Humongous, glaring issue. I get that you're a Leighton guy, but be realistic.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
07-26-2013, 09:11 PM
  #505
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Eh, I think Gus is overrated around here. I'd rather trade Mez, but in the future (even if not this season), if Gus get's dealt I won't be too broken up about it.
Gus is pretty decent but doesn't really excel at anything. I could see him developing into a solid #4 defensemen but some people do a get little carried away with his hype.

I don't see the Flyers going with Mez over Gus though. They need some type of youth on the backend.


Last edited by LegionOfDoom91: 07-26-2013 at 09:21 PM.
LegionOfDoom91 is online now  
Old
07-26-2013, 09:12 PM
  #506
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
Cheap, capable top 4 defensemen are at a premium.

Trading them, especially one that fits our biggest need, is beyond stupid if it means keeping a 27-year-old glass defenseman on a lucrative pay grade.

Just losing Gustafsson isn't a huge blow, it's the context and the relative stupidity surrounding it, especially when he has shown all the signs without being given the opportunity to prove he could a huge contributor.

You should be absolutely pissed if something like what was suggested actually occurs.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I am not saying trade Gus instead of trading Mez. I am saying that if Gus is traded at some point like Sharp was, I wouldn't be broken up about it. Also, calling him a cheap capable top four defenseman is why I think he is overrated. The guy has played 60 NHL games. I'd say about 10 were below average, maybe 15-20 were above average, and 25-30 were average. I have not seen him consistently play well enough to be considered a top four defender. He may eventually be a top four guy, but at this point to call him that I think is jumping the gun. Let's at least let him play a full season in the NHL, instead of a couple parts of a couple seasons.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-26-2013, 09:46 PM
  #507
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Let's at least let him play a full season in the NHL, instead of a couple parts of a couple seasons.
That's the ****ing point. We don't know how high he can reach just yet, AND he fills a need, moreso than Glasszaros.

CS is offline  
Old
07-26-2013, 10:23 PM
  #508
FlyersFan61290
Registered User
 
FlyersFan61290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,400
vCash: 500
I don't think many overrate Gus right now, maybe a few. I think most just realize that he's a solid 3rd pairing guy w/ potential to be a good complimentary #4 d-man. At this point considering his age, price, current level of play and potential he's just a much better option for a roster spot (now and in the immediate future) when compared to Mez and Bruno.

FlyersFan61290 is online now  
Old
07-26-2013, 10:36 PM
  #509
The Couturier Effect
Registered User
 
The Couturier Effect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,751
vCash: 500
Jets re-signed Blake Wheeler to a 6 year deal worth $33mil.

The Couturier Effect is online now  
Old
07-27-2013, 06:14 AM
  #510
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
They played fine. You know who didn't play fine? Leighton. Asking them to play better is just absurd. Asking the guy who downright sucked in every possible way to just suck a little less makes a lot more sense.

Scoring goals: Minor, minimal issue. Nonissue, actually. The team as a whole scored enough, and those guys you called out were still very good defensively.

Goalkeeping: Humongous, glaring issue. I get that you're a Leighton guy, but be realistic.
Ok, let me get this straight. Your two best offensive players and probably your fourth or fifth best offensive player were "fine" in the SCF. You definition of fine is three of your top five players scoring two points each and being a -21. Even if I would agree with you that their play could be categorized as "fine" throughout the series (which I don't), you are going to tell me that you think you can win a Stanley Cup where three of your top five players play "fine" in the series? And that is without getting into the fact that there were three one goal losses.

And once again, I agree that improved play by Leighton would have helped. I have never once said it wouldn't have. I don't know why you keep acting like I am saying goaltending was not an issue. It absolutely was. But there were other issues. It isn't a hard concept. But I guess you are right, as usual, because you say so. Richards, Carter, and Gagne's performances were fine and improved play from them would not have had the same impact on the series.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
That's the ****ing point. We don't know how high he can reach just yet, AND he fills a need, moreso than Glasszaros.
Huh? I didn't say I'd rather have Mez than Gus. I said if Gus gets traded in a Sharp-like situation, I wouldn't be too broken up about it. I want (and expect) Mez to be traded.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 06:18 AM
  #511
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Huh? I didn't say I'd rather have Mez than Gus. I said if Gus gets traded in a Sharp-like situation, I wouldn't be too broken up about it. I want (and expect) Mez to be traded.
I would clarify by saying that if both are healthy I would play Mez over Gus, but if the team were going to trade one of them, the obvious choice is Mezaros to be traded. Mez is a better player than Gus right now. His only problem is his health. If he is healthy, he plays over Gus. That being said, I would be pretty shocked if Mez isn't traded.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 07:20 AM
  #512
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
I would clarify by saying that if both are healthy I would play Mez over Gus, but if the team were going to trade one of them, the obvious choice is Mezaros to be traded. Mez is a better player than Gus right now. His only problem is his health. If he is healthy, he plays over Gus. That being said, I would be pretty shocked if Mez isn't traded.
Not until he proves it. I wish people would stop just assuming that Meszaros is anything like the player he once was.

CS is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 07:31 AM
  #513
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
Not until he proves it. I wish people would stop just assuming that Meszaros is anything like the player he once was.
I wish people would stop assuming Gus is better than Mez because Mez got injured. You don't just throw away a guy's whole career because he had a bad part of a season coming off an injury. Usually it is the guy who hasn't proven any thing that has to do the proving, not the guy who outside of last season and one season in Tampa has always looked better than Gus, despite Gus's legendary performance in his first 60 games over parts of three seasons. While it is 100% possible that Mez's injury issues are going to bring down his play, even to the point where Gus is better, Gus is the one who needs to prove this, not Mez.

I once again want to point out that Gus has played in 60 NHL games. He has not proven ANYTHING.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 08:24 AM
  #514
Bryz4shiz
Registered User
 
Bryz4shiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Alhoa Oe
Posts: 2,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Ok, let me get this straight. Your two best offensive players and probably your fourth or fifth best offensive player were "fine" in the SCF. You definition of fine is three of your top five players scoring two points each and being a -21. Even if I would agree with you that their play could be categorized as "fine" throughout the series (which I don't), you are going to tell me that you think you can win a Stanley Cup where three of your top five players play "fine" in the series? And that is without getting into the fact that there were three one goal losses.

And once again, I agree that improved play by Leighton would have helped. I have never once said it wouldn't have. I don't know why you keep acting like I am saying goaltending was not an issue. It absolutely was. But there were other issues. It isn't a hard concept. But I guess you are right, as usual, because you say so. Richards, Carter, and Gagne's performances were fine and improved play from them would not have had the same impact on the series.
It's like you have conveniently forgot how they totally shutdown the Toews line. Those two lines absolutely negated each other. They did what they had to do to win, but our 3rd pairing playing a combined 5 minutes a night, and the absolute ****show in net lost the series

Bryz4shiz is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 08:48 AM
  #515
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryz4shiz View Post
It's like you have conveniently forgot how they totally shutdown the Toews line. Those two lines absolutely negated each other. They did what they had to do to win, but our 3rd pairing playing a combined 5 minutes a night, and the absolute ****show in net lost the series
You act as though those players weren't counted to shut down other lines. They were tasked with that in the other series as well. Shut down best players and generate offense. That role didn't change in the Finals and it is ridiculous to say that it did. All of the sudden Mike Richards, your leading scorer in the playoffs, his offense is not needed? Give me a break. Yes, he was responsible for shutting down Toews, and he did that. But he still was counted on to generate offense. And again, you have understand that I am 100%, unequivocally, NOT saying that Richards, Carter, and Gagne are the ONLY reason they lost. They were part of it, and if they played better offensively, you cannot legitimately sit there and say it would not have had the same impact as improved goaltending. It's not like I am asking for much...shouldn't your leading scorer score points? Shouldn't your second leading scorer in the regular season, who scored five points in the first six games he played in the post season, be expected to deliver? This isn't some outlandish statement. There were a number of reasons the team lost. To win the Cup, pretty much everyone has to play to their limits, and most especially your best players have to (or at least the players you rely on most have to).

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 09:26 AM
  #516
FlyersFan61290
Registered User
 
FlyersFan61290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,400
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
You act as though those players weren't counted to shut down other lines. They were tasked with that in the other series as well. Shut down best players and generate offense. That role didn't change in the Finals and it is ridiculous to say that it did. All of the sudden Mike Richards, your leading scorer in the playoffs, his offense is not needed? Give me a break. Yes, he was responsible for shutting down Toews, and he did that. But he still was counted on to generate offense. And again, you have understand that I am 100%, unequivocally, NOT saying that Richards, Carter, and Gagne are the ONLY reason they lost. They were part of it, and if they played better offensively, you cannot legitimately sit there and say it would not have had the same impact as improved goaltending. It's not like I am asking for much...shouldn't your leading scorer score points? Shouldn't your second leading scorer in the regular season, who scored five points in the first six games he played in the post season, be expected to deliver? This isn't some outlandish statement. There were a number of reasons the team lost. To win the Cup, pretty much everyone has to play to their limits, and most especially your best players have to (or at least the players you rely on most have to).
Everyone would agree that if Richards, Carter and Gagne put up more points the Flyers could have won it all. I think the point Beef is trying to make is that the offense as a whole didn't have to be better as they put up enough goals to win if they had had a decent goalie. So if someone asked you to identify one reason the Flyers lost you'd have to say goaltending IMO even if it's not that simple. Honestly though it's never that simple when dissecting a loss.

Btw you called Richards the leading scorer in the playoffs but I'm pretty sure at least Briere had more points then Richie going into the finals.

FlyersFan61290 is online now  
Old
07-27-2013, 09:36 AM
  #517
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,302
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Ok, let me get this straight. Your two best offensive players and probably your fourth or fifth best offensive player were "fine" in the SCF. You definition of fine is three of your top five players scoring two points each and being a -21. Even if I would agree with you that their play could be categorized as "fine" throughout the series (which I don't), you are going to tell me that you think you can win a Stanley Cup where three of your top five players play "fine" in the series? And that is without getting into the fact that there were three one goal losses.

And once again, I agree that improved play by Leighton would have helped. I have never once said it wouldn't have. I don't know why you keep acting like I am saying goaltending was not an issue. It absolutely was. But there were other issues. It isn't a hard concept. But I guess you are right, as usual, because you say so. Richards, Carter, and Gagne's performances were fine and improved play from them would not have had the same impact on the series.



Huh? I didn't say I'd rather have Mez than Gus. I said if Gus gets traded in a Sharp-like situation, I wouldn't be too broken up about it. I want (and expect) Mez to be traded.
You're right. It's not a hard concept. Goaltending was 80-90% of the issue. The rest of the team was about 10-20%, at most. The rest of the team was good enough except for the slob in the crease.

Goalies who suck have a much bigger impact that a skater that sucks. A goalie sucking is a far, far larger issue than a skater sucking.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 09:40 AM
  #518
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
Everyone would agree that if Richards, Carter and Gagne put up more points the Flyers could have won it all. I think the point Beef is trying to make is that the offense as a whole didn't have to be better as they put up enough goals to win if they had had a decent goalie. So if someone asked you to identify one reason the Flyers lost you'd have to say goaltending IMO even if it's not that simple. Honestly though it's never that simple when dissecting a loss.
Well sure goaltending is the first thing that comes to mind (it usually does in a loss). And it certainly was part of the problem. But as I said form the beginning, it is just as likely that improved play from those three would have had the same impact as improved play from the goaltending position. And once again, it is not too much to ask that your two top offensive players on your team actually produce as such (even if the rest of the team picks up the slack). This is the Cup Finals. If your best offensive players aren't producing, you won't win.

Quote:
Btw you called Richards the leading scorer in the playoffs but I'm pretty sure at least Briere had more points then Richie going into the finals.
Mike Richards: 21 points heading into the Finals
Danny Briere: 18 points heading into the Finals

Briere had 12 points in the Finals to Richards 2 points.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 09:42 AM
  #519
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
You're right. It's not a hard concept. Goaltending was 80-90% of the issue. The rest of the team was about 10-20%, at most. The rest of the team was good enough except for the slob in the crease.

Goalies who suck have a much bigger impact that a skater that sucks. A goalie sucking is a far, far larger issue than a skater sucking.
That may be true. I probably wouldn't argue that. But does a goalie sucking have a bigger impact than your two best offensive players sucking (plus probably your fourth or fifth best offensive player sucking)? I would probably say it's about the same, especially if three out of four losses are one goal games.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 09:44 AM
  #520
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,302
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That may be true. I probably wouldn't argue that. But does a goalie sucking have a bigger impact than your two best offensive players sucking (plus probably your fourth or fifth best offensive player sucking)? I would probably say it's about the same, especially if three out of four losses are one goal games.
When your team STILL scores 22 goals, no, it has no impact. Other skaters can pick up the slack, and on a deep team that's what happens. We saw it from Chicago, too. However, there is no making up for crappy goaltending.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 10:18 AM
  #521
FlyersFan61290
Registered User
 
FlyersFan61290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,400
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Mike Richards: 21 points heading into the Finals
Danny Briere: 18 points heading into the Finals

Briere had 12 points in the Finals to Richards 2 points.
My mistake, I didn't look up any of the numbers so I was just going on faulty memory.

FlyersFan61290 is online now  
Old
07-27-2013, 11:16 AM
  #522
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
When your team STILL scores 22 goals, no, it has no impact. Other skaters can pick up the slack, and on a deep team that's what happens.
That's interesting. It is ok for your best players to not contribute offensively in Stanley Cup Finals if other players are contributing. That is a sentiment that I have never heard before.

Quote:
We saw it from Chicago, too. However, there is no making up for crappy goaltending.
When did we see it from Chicago? Let's say Toews and Kane are the Chicago equivalent to Richards and Carter. In 2010 Toews may have been shut down, but I'm pretty sure Patrick Kane had more than a PPG. This year Kane and Toews both had five points in the finals (.83 PPG), not exactly the same thing as two points (.33 PPG). If Richards and Carter had three more points each, chances are the Flyers would have won (NU-UH BECAUSE LEIGHTON SUCKED AND EVERYONE ELSE PLAYED WELL!).

But again, I'll just concede because you are always right. Leighton's poor play had more of an impact than the poor offensive production of Richards (the team's leading scorer going into the series) and Carter (arguably the team's best goal scorer). Improved play in net would have won them a Cup. Improved play from their best offensive players wouldn't have, even though three of the four losses were one goal games. I'll take my wild, off-the-wall, extreme theories elsewhere.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 11:38 AM
  #523
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,002
vCash: 500
Looks like it's time to blow the dust off the recordings of the finals, and to see how many beachballs Leighton let in. By my faulty memory, he let in several and failed to come up with momentum-changing saves, but the team D started to break down and with the third pairing still unable to contribute enough ice time for Pronger and Timonen to take two breaths and a swig of Gatorade on the bench, they were running on fumes. And I do remember the play of the Richards-Carter-Gagne line being an issue in the finals, with the caveat that Carter was playing through a broken foot.

If I were asked to assign blame for the loss, before having jogged my memory, I'd say 65% MFL, 25% a dead-tired top 4 D, and 10% play of the offense.

BernieParent is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 11:39 AM
  #524
King Forsberg
21 68 88 16 44 28
 
King Forsberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,125
vCash: 300
Games 1 and 2 were tough to watch because they were so winnable for the Flyers. Who knows what happens if we win one of those first 2 games.

King Forsberg is online now  
Old
07-27-2013, 06:33 PM
  #525
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,205
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
We saw it from Chicago, too. However, there is no making up for crappy goaltending.
Another thing about this...look at the last three Cup losers and their best offensive players since the Flyers lost. You'll find that in that series, they were limited offensively. There were other issues with these teams, as well, but like the Flyers problems in 2010, this was a part of it. Everyone has to show up to win it all.

2013: Boston (kind of tough to say who their best offensive players are but I would say it is probably Horton, Krejci, or Marchand since he led the team in points during the regular season). Horton had 2 points, Marchand had 0. Krejci had 5 so this I guess could be considered your best offensive player showing up, if you consider Krejci your best offensive player.

2012: NJ. Parise and Kovalchuk had one point each.

2011: Vancouver. The Sedins had five points between the two.

2010: Philly. Richards/Carter had four points between the two.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Closed Thread

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 08:50 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.