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

Around the League #5: 2013 Play-offs Edition!: Nucks fire AV, AVs hire Roy

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-30-2013, 01:24 PM
  #551
oilersfan11
Registered User
 
oilersfan11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 11,274
vCash: 50
Pittsburgh vs Boston-----Pittsburgh in 7


LA vs Chicago----LA in 6



Stanley Cup Final

Pittsburgh vs LA


Pittsburgh in 7

oilersfan11 is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 02:16 PM
  #552
frag2
Registered User
 
frag2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,397
vCash: 500
I hope it's a Chi vs Pit final...maybe we will see a pseudo 80s playoff series haha

frag2 is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:15 PM
  #553
OilerTyler
Fire Lowe
 
OilerTyler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,670
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Perfect Human View Post
My favorite is the rare occasion Toews gets stuck with non-star calibre. I think once he was carrying Stalberg-Bickell. That was LOL. Produced like Bolland
Is this the same Toews who led the league in even strength goals while carrying a rookie on his wing for the entire season?

He definitely isn't a product of his line mates.

OilerTyler is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:40 PM
  #554
Toydarian
Registered User
 
Toydarian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,503
vCash: 500
I don't know what the line matchups will be, but lets just go 1v1, 2v2, etc for arguments sake.

Sharp is a superior player to Williams both defensively and offensively.

Regardless of whether it's Kane or Hossa, they are both better than Brown.

Toews and Kopitar are pretty much equal. It's trivial semantics if you're trying to definitively say who is better.

If Bickell - Handzus - Hossa face the Penner - Richards - Carter line, the CHI line has the size and ability to withstand the physical play of the LAK line. Offensively, I don't think the CHI line can match the LAK 2nd line so we shall see.

Regardless, I could see this series going either way.

Toydarian is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:56 PM
  #555
Senor Catface
Registered User
 
Senor Catface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Nepal
Posts: 6,166
vCash: 500
Voice 1:Kopitar is so much better than Toews!!! Toews only has 1 goal and 6 points! Suck on that Toews!

Voice of Reason:...Oh dang, Kopitar has...one more goal than Toews and only one more point...and not being hounded by one of the best defensive players in the conference for a 7 game series. And yes. Zetterberg is that. Uh, I better move on to something else.

Voice 1:Kopitar had one of the best playoff runs of the last 5 years! Suck on that Toews! Your name doesn't even pronounce the way its spelled!

Voice of Reason:...Oh. Toews had 29 points in 22 games only a few years ago. Oh, look up how many players have had more than 1.3 PPG game the last 20 years through the finals? Uh. Damn it! But my AGENDA!

Senor Catface is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:06 PM
  #556
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
The Hawks haven't won a playoff series against a top club in years. They had everything they could handle and more against a 7th place Detroit club that was game but gave up far too many scoring chances and had trouble finishing themselves.

The Hawks got by the Wild and Red Wings. Whoop de do. Lets see what they do against a loaded club.

I'm just saying the Kings are going to be a whole other level. Also imo any of the Kings, Sharks, Blues would handle the Hawks easy in a playoff series.

Lets see it unfold.
It's hilarious that you'll shoot down actual results as "meaningless regular season", but have no problem using contrived hypothetical situations "Sharks, Blues would beat Hawks in playoffs" as a method of smearing Chicago.

Is the fact that this vaunted LA juggernaut is a pathetic 1-5 on the road in the playoffs of any concern at all? Condsidering they don't have home ice advantage in this series against an opponent that is 6-1 in their own barn? This is not the 2012 Kings, this team has already lost more games in two rounds than last year's team did in the entire playoffs.

LA has played two teams that play the exact same style as them. When you're the best at your style (LA is), it's a perfect scenario to draw similar opponents. As it is, the Kings barely survived both of them. Now they are playing a team with far more speed than they've faced, and a team that can roll over four lines and expect offense out of any of them. Big contrast to Blues and Sharks. If anybody is in for a rude awakening, it's the Kings.

Kyle McMahon is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:15 PM
  #557
Toydarian
Registered User
 
Toydarian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,503
vCash: 500
Another thing to consider, LAK haven't faced a team who has both good moving dmen and forwards.STL had the dmen but not the forwards, SJS had the forwards but not the dmen.

Toydarian is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:34 PM
  #558
Senor Catface
Registered User
 
Senor Catface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Nepal
Posts: 6,166
vCash: 500
By the way, this is Chicago's third WCF in 5 years.

Fantastic team.

Senor Catface is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:47 PM
  #559
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,129
vCash: 50
Personally I think LA wins and is the better team, but the way Chicago was being talked about is ridiculous.

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:49 PM
  #560
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senor Catface View Post
By the way, this is Chicago's third WCF in 5 years.

Fantastic team.
What are you talking about? They lost in Game 7 OT to a horrible 1st overall team two years ago, and only won the Cup due to terrible opponents.

Kyle McMahon is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 06:13 PM
  #561
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 36,297
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
It's hilarious that you'll shoot down actual results as "meaningless regular season", but have no problem using contrived hypothetical situations "Sharks, Blues would beat Hawks in playoffs" as a method of smearing Chicago.
Um, whats confusing at all about the FACT that the Phoenix Coyotes walked all over the Hawks in the playoffs last year and the Kings stomped on the very same Coyotes?

How is that not indicative of the two respective clubs? Its a common opponent faced at the same time.

Wouldn't surprise me if Hawks look good early in the series. But we all know the Hawks don't play 60mins of games and don't bring it every game. LA leans on a club, like a skilled heavyweight with reach. By game 3 and 4 LA will have the needed edge. If they don't have it already. Curiously the same people telling me LA KINGS are riding horseshoes and are in for a shock were telling me the same thing last season when I was predicting Kings would win the cup.

Grasping at the Kings not winning games on the road this postseason is odd at best. They were Kings on the road last year and perfectly capable. You think somehow that ability to play a solid road game went away? Comments like that smack of desperation in an argument.


Last edited by Replacement: 05-30-2013 at 06:21 PM.
Replacement is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 06:31 PM
  #562
dustrock
Too Legit To Quit
 
dustrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,818
vCash: 500
sharks centers are pretty great defensively. Kopitar will have a good series.

dustrock is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 06:48 PM
  #563
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 36,297
vCash: 500
Hawks fans can ask themselves as well what it is about a club that loses 3 games in a row stints in the playoffs?

What is it about this Hawks club that gets outscored 9-2 combined in 3 successive games in a 7 game series. When the same Hawks team buried themselves losing 3 in a row to the Nucks a couple years ago.

What is it?

Oh, arrogance.

They better be prepared to play every game hard against LA and not take nights off.

Replacement is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 07:14 PM
  #564
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Um, whats confusing at all about the FACT that the Phoenix Coyotes walked all over the Hawks in the playoffs last year and the Kings stomped on the very same Coyotes?
Last I checked my calendar read 2013. You're the only one in here reaching back to previous playoff years and trying to employ some sort of bizarre "rock-paper-scissors" scenario to speculate who would win certain matchups. The Kings got pounded by the Sharks in 2011...the very same Sharks that the Hawks swept in 2010. So therefore the Hawks should easily beat the Kings. See how ridiculous this sounds?

Quote:
Wouldn't surprise me if Hawks look good early in the series. But we all know the Hawks don't play 60mins of games and don't bring it every game. LA leans on a club, like a skilled heavyweight with reach. By game 3 and 4 LA will have the needed edge. If they don't have it already. Curiously the same people telling me LA KINGS are riding horseshoes and are in for a shock were telling me the same thing last season when I was predicting Kings would win the cup.
I don't see anyone in here claiming the Kings are using horseshoes. The majority seem to be picking them to win, and everyone seems to think it will be a great series, myself included. You meanwhile seem to be on some sort of crusade to discredit and dismiss everything the Hawks have done over the last 5 years up until now, and are gleefully anticipating the dynasty Kings destroying them. As though it is patently ridiculous that a team that went 36-7-5 and is 8-4 in the playoffs could possibly stand a chance against a team that finished 5th and is 8-5 in the playoffs.

Quote:
Grasping at the Kings not winning games on the road this postseason is odd at best. They were Kings on the road last year and perfectly capable. You think somehow that ability to play a solid road game went away? Comments like that smack of desperation in an argument.
So pointing out that the Kings cannot win on the road, but must do so at least once to win this series is a desperate argument? Clearly that ability to play a solid road game hasn't been evident up to this point. 1-5 on the road and 7-0 at home indicates that the Kings are nearly impossible to beat when Sutter gets his matchups, but very vulnerable when he doesn't. I don't see how this can even be argued. They were 10-1 on the road last year. Pretty obvious that opposing coaches have keyed on something that they can exploit when they get the home ice matchup advantage. We'll see if Quenneville continues the trend.

What is being downplayed here, and the one spot where LA has a clear advantage, is in net. Crawford gives up awful goals with regularity, very nearly costing the Blackhawks Game 6 against the Wings. If LA wins the series, the number one reason will probably be Quick outplaying Crawford.

Kyle McMahon is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 07:23 PM
  #565
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 36,297
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Last I checked my calendar read 2013. You're the only one in here reaching back to previous playoff years and trying to employ some sort of bizarre "rock-paper-scissors" scenario to speculate who would win certain matchups. The Kings got pounded by the Sharks in 2011...the very same Sharks that the Hawks swept in 2010. So therefore the Hawks should easily beat the Kings. See how ridiculous this sounds?



I don't see anyone in here claiming the Kings are using horseshoes. The majority seem to be picking them to win, and everyone seems to think it will be a great series, myself included. You meanwhile seem to be on some sort of crusade to discredit and dismiss everything the Hawks have done over the last 5 years up until now, and are gleefully anticipating the dynasty Kings destroying them. As though it is patently ridiculous that a team that went 36-7-5 and is 8-4 in the playoffs could possibly stand a chance against a team that finished 5th and is 8-5 in the playoffs.



So pointing out that the Kings cannot win on the road, but must do so at least once to win this series is a desperate argument? Clearly that ability to play a solid road game hasn't been evident up to this point. 1-5 on the road and 7-0 at home indicates that the Kings are nearly impossible to beat when Sutter gets his matchups, but very vulnerable when he doesn't. I don't see how this can even be argued. They were 10-1 on the road last year. Pretty obvious that opposing coaches have keyed on something that they can exploit when they get the home ice matchup advantage. We'll see if Quenneville continues the trend.

What is being downplayed here, and the one spot where LA has a clear advantage, is in net. Crawford gives up awful goals with regularity, very nearly costing the Blackhawks Game 6 against the Wings. If LA wins the series, the number one reason will probably be Quick outplaying Crawford.

See how LA gets discredited in this? I'm basically just responding to nonsense that the Kings aren't worthy, aren't as good, and only ride goaltending. Which has been stated frequently here this year and last. I don't get the fervent Kings dislike here.

What we've seen in past years are Hawks are susceptible to being beat by strong system play. Something the Kings are masters of.

It should be good viewing if Hawks can hold up their end.

Replacement is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 07:32 PM
  #566
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
See how LA gets discredited in this? I'm basically just responding to nonsense that the Kings aren't worthy, aren't as good, and only ride goaltending. Which has been stated frequently here this year and last. I don't get the fervent Kings dislike here.

What we've seen in past years are Hawks are susceptible to being beat by strong system play. Something the Kings are masters of.

It should be good viewing if Hawks can hold up their end.
I fail to see how stating that the defending Conn Smythe winner, who set the record with best save percentage of all time last year potentially outplaying a guy who already has a lowlite reel full of bad goals in just 25 career playoff games is discrditing the Kings. Goaltending is obviously Chicago's Achilles heel, but is one of LA's biggest strengths.

Kyle McMahon is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 07:35 PM
  #567
Toydarian
Registered User
 
Toydarian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,503
vCash: 500
People will point out goaltending because it's clearly the catagory LAK is better in than CHI. The Kings have been strong all around, but their goaltending has really been a difference maker both last post-season and this post-season.

CHI is also a much stronger offensive team than STL and SJS so it would only make sense that Quick will be a big factor throughout the series.

Toydarian is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 07:49 PM
  #568
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 36,297
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
I fail to see how stating that the defending Conn Smythe winner, who set the record with best save percentage of all time last year potentially outplaying a guy who already has a lowlite reel full of bad goals in just 25 career playoff games is discrditing the Kings. Goaltending is obviously Chicago's Achilles heel, but is one of LA's biggest strengths.
The Conn Smythe award is arbitrary. One can choose to look at something like save % or the excellent shutdown play of the players in front of the goalie keeping everything to the outside. An arbitrary trophy award isn't evidence. I watched all the games. Kings played great in front of Quick for 4 series.

I love Quick, but any LA fan recognizes that Kopitar was fantastic last spring. PPG, +16. Keep in mind this is +16 on a team that isn't high scoring club.

To get a gauge on how dominant this is Pronger was +10 when he was in god mode in 05-06 playoffs.

tbh I'd pick Kopitar, Brown, or Doughty as Conn Smythe before Quick.

People that are quick to say its all on quick are trying to argue that LA, an excellent club, are Phoenix. Major difference.

Quick wasn't even any good in the STL series and Kings still won the last 4 games.


Last edited by Replacement: 05-30-2013 at 07:57 PM.
Replacement is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 07:09 AM
  #569
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
The Conn Smythe award is arbitrary. One can choose to look at something like save % or the excellent shutdown play of the players in front of the goalie keeping everything to the outside. An arbitrary trophy award isn't evidence. I watched all the games. Kings played great in front of Quick for 4 series.

I love Quick, but any LA fan recognizes that Kopitar was fantastic last spring. PPG, +16. Keep in mind this is +16 on a team that isn't high scoring club.

To get a gauge on how dominant this is Pronger was +10 when he was in god mode in 05-06 playoffs.

tbh I'd pick Kopitar, Brown, or Doughty as Conn Smythe before Quick.

People that are quick to say its all on quick are trying to argue that LA, an excellent club, are Phoenix. Major difference.

Quick wasn't even any good in the STL series and Kings still won the last 4 games.
I certainly haven't gone through this entire thread, but if a bunch of people are saying the Kings only win because of Quick or just rode a hot goalie to the Cup I haven't seen it, nor would I agree with it. I watched all the games too and said LA was not going to be stopped last year after the first win against St. Louis in Round 2. That said, Quick over Crawford is still LA's biggest advantage IMO.

Kyle McMahon is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 08:22 AM
  #570
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,129
vCash: 50
This should make Replacement happy.

Last night on twitter I saw a few tweets/retweets about how Stoll and Torres meet face to face. I think it was that night. Stoll thought it was a clean hit.

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
06-01-2013, 04:49 PM
  #571
GreatKeith
Super Smashed Oilers
 
GreatKeith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 11,172
vCash: 50
So the Hawks outshoot the Kings 17-2 after one period and are trailing 1-0.

Ladies and gentlemen, what you're witnessing are the final days of the NHL. Where you don't have to be the best team to win. Just the one with the best defense/goaltending/trap method.

If the Kings win the Cup this year I might become a Jays fan instead.

GreatKeith is online now  
Old
06-01-2013, 04:51 PM
  #572
Hockey Nightmare
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,098
vCash: 500
I hope you're loving this Bettman.

Hockey Nightmare is offline  
Old
06-01-2013, 04:55 PM
  #573
Del Preston
Pass to Purcell
 
Del Preston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,428
vCash: 50
That was painful.

Del Preston is offline  
Old
06-01-2013, 05:19 PM
  #574
Baby Nilsson
Registered User
 
Baby Nilsson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreatKeith View Post
So the Hawks outshoot the Kings 17-2 after one period and are trailing 1-0.

Ladies and gentlemen, what you're witnessing are the final days of the NHL. Where you don't have to be the best team to win. Just the one with the best defense/goaltending/trap method.

If the Kings win the Cup this year I might become a Jays fan instead.
You gotta give Quick credit.. He's unstoppable right now.. the way he plays the puck.. can't beat him high, can't beat him low. Just gotta hope for a screw up somehow.

Baby Nilsson is offline  
Old
06-01-2013, 05:32 PM
  #575
Philly85
Moody'
 
Philly85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,109
vCash: 500
About time. Hawks have been dominating. Like, completely. Outhitting, out shooting, out chancing...

Philly85 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 09:02 AM.

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.