HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Has there been a great player with a worse playoff series than Malkin/Crosby in 2013?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-12-2013, 03:02 AM
  #26
Malkin112*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,359
vCash: 500
Malkin was very unlucky in that series. I think he had at least 3-4 posts and couple of very unlucky bounces. Also he had some kind of shoulder injury all season long which made his shot less effective. But all in all it was very embarrassing series both Crosby and Malkin.
This was basically third Play off choke both of these guys, they need to pick up their game ASAP.

Malkin112* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2013, 12:16 PM
  #27
McGuillicuddy
Registered User
 
McGuillicuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabroni1994 View Post
Yeah, I think he had a torn labium.
Agreed.

McGuillicuddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2013, 03:57 PM
  #28
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
Variance?

I'd love to see the Corsi/possession breakdown of the series. Because let's face it, four games is a freaking tiny sample size, and to make any judgment one would have to see whether or not Crosby and Malkin were being legitimately outplayed or were just unlucky.

Also, at a certain point you wonder whether to call it a bad series on their part or just a phenomenal series on the part of Rask/Bergeron/Chara/etc.
Well we just saw all the games but a week ago. For reasons I can't pinpoint, neither Crosby or Malkin nor the Pens did a whole lot in Game 1 & 2. Their stats reflect how they played. Rask didn't stand on his head at all, it was a lot like Osgood in the first two games of the 2008 Cup final. A person who looks at the final score assumes the goalie had to have played great, but he didn't because he didn't need to. The Pens couldn't penetrate the zone or generate scoring chances, even on the power play.

Game 3 & 4 Malkin looked better. Game 3 in particular I think. He had some scoring chances but I wouldn't have called either Crosby or Malkin "unlucky" because it isn't as if they rung it off the post while Rask was out of position a bunch of times. The 1993 Pens were very unlucky, the 2013 team wasn't. There was double overtime in Game 3 and there is never a more perfect time to carry your team and end the game on your own will. This could have changed the series for Pittsburgh and they blew it. Yes Malkin was a little hooked on the goal leading to the transition, but too many times I saw Malkin coasting back into the defensive zone during these playoffs. We are talking about two players that lit the entire 2009 playoffs on fire and know full well how to win a Cup, and they couldn't even muster a point in the series.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2013, 05:02 PM
  #29
Bourne Endeavor
Registered User
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,544
vCash: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
pretty sure henrik had a shoulder injury. daniel, on the other hand, i don't think had any excuse for his poor showing. complete lack of pushback by that guy, certainly not limited to letting marchand repeatedly punch him in the face.

worse yet, though, bertuzzi in 2003 against minnesota.
Henrik had a pulled groin and had difficulty taking faceoffs. Daniel, indeed, was among the few healthy.

Bourne Endeavor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2013, 05:11 PM
  #30
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Keep this to the truly elite players, guys that should have dominated and made a difference in the series.
Adjust (how I always wanted to use that term; irony ) some of the numbers of the '83 SCF Oilers in the Isles sweep of them that spring, and I'd guess they would rival or exceed Crosby and Malkin's failures in this most recent series vs. Boston.

If I recall correctly (off the top of my head), Gretzky had four points, Messier and Coffey had one point or something of the kind. Unsure about Kurri and Anderson.

And this was in a high-powered era, as you know, coming off record breaking offensive regular season. (Not to mention, I believe the Oilers came into that series averaging 6+ goals a game in the postseason). That's a lot of HOFs coming up virtually empty.

Those numbers were wretched then...and adjusted downward to equate to today, they'd be even worse.

Trottier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2013, 07:04 PM
  #31
Boom Boom Bear
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Coast Salish lands
Country:
Posts: 1,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
Adjust (how I always wanted to use that term; irony ) some of the numbers of the '83 SCF Oilers in the Isles sweep of them that spring, and I'd guess they would rival or exceed Crosby and Malkin's failures in this most recent series vs. Boston.

If I recall correctly (off the top of my head), Gretzky had four points, Messier and Coffey had one point or something of the kind. Unsure about Kurri and Anderson.

And this was in a high-powered era, as you know, coming off record breaking offensive regular season. (Not to mention, I believe the Oilers came into that series averaging 6+ goals a game in the postseason). That's a lot of HOFs coming up virtually empty.

Those numbers were wretched then...and adjusted downward to equate to today, they'd be even worse.
Adjust the numbers all you want, but it will still give you values higher than Crosby & Malkin's ZERO, which is an unadjustable number. Gretzky, Coffey, Messier, Kurri ALL contributed to the offense. The HHOF superstars on the Oilers were not completely shut down like Crosby & Malkin. That's a huge difference.

Also when you factor in the that the Islanders were *the* dominant team in the league, about to win their fourth Cup, & the young Oilers barely had any playoff experience, having been bounced in the first round in 82, it pales in comparison to Crosby & Malkin's playoff experience & Cup win, & the quality of opposition in the Bruins.

The two guys who are generally considered the best players in the game today were *completely* shut down deep into the playoffs. I can't think of a worse showing in the expansion era.

Boom Boom Bear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2013, 07:10 PM
  #32
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
Adjust (how I always wanted to use that term; irony ) some of the numbers of the '83 SCF Oilers in the Isles sweep of them that spring, and I'd guess they would rival or exceed Crosby and Malkin's failures in this most recent series vs. Boston.

If I recall correctly (off the top of my head), Gretzky had four points, Messier and Coffey had one point or something of the kind. Unsure about Kurri and Anderson.

And this was in a high-powered era, as you know, coming off record breaking offensive regular season. (Not to mention, I believe the Oilers came into that series averaging 6+ goals a game in the postseason). That's a lot of HOFs coming up virtually empty.

Those numbers were wretched then...and adjusted downward to equate to today, they'd be even worse.
Gretzky not so much because he did manage 4 points. But yeah, the others I can't understand. I guess the only way to look at it is that Coffey and Messier and the rest of them hadn't won a Cup yet. They were still green in 1983 and to be honest Billy Smith is really credited with slamming the door on them, so they had their chances. But yeah, it was a morbid production. I'm not saying they get a free pass or that Bossy and Trottier in 1979 get one either because they certainly were still great teams and great players, but they hadn't won yet. Crosby and Malkin have the savvy and experience in winning so it isn't as if they haven't been there before.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2013, 12:16 AM
  #33
The Kingslayer
Registered User
 
The Kingslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Siem Reap, Cambodia
Country: Cambodia
Posts: 36,178
vCash: 50
No show Joe (Sakic) in 1999 and 2000

The Kingslayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2013, 01:06 AM
  #34
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Bear View Post
Adjust the numbers all you want, but it will still give you values higher than Crosby & Malkin's ZERO, which is an unadjustable number.
Obviously the sarcasm about "adjusted" was lost on you entirely.

Quote:
Gretzky, Coffey, Messier, Kurri ALL contributed to the offense. The HHOF superstars on the Oilers were not completely shut down like Crosby & Malkin. That's a huge difference.
Based on a literal interpretation of stats (only), you are correct. However, ask anyone who is familar with that series, and they would never would never make that comment ("were not completely shut down"). Because, they were. Hence, the four game sweep.

It's the difference between looking at a stat sheet 30 years after the fact and witnessing when those points were achieved in the course of a game and a series. The measly points put up by Gretzky, et al "contributed" to the stats sheet. They contributed little to nothing toward impacting the series. Context still means something to some of us.

Quote:
Also when you factor in the that the Islanders were *the* dominant team in the league, about to win their fourth Cup, & the young Oilers barely had any playoff experience, having been bounced in the first round in 82, it pales in comparison to Crosby & Malkin's playoff experience & Cup win, & the quality of opposition in the Bruins.
Hardly. Check out what the hockey world was predicting (incorrectly) coming into that postseason, and even into the SCF series, despite NYI being the three-time champs. Feel free to disagree with my opinion, but no need to embellish with the "pales in comparision" nonsense. It was a tremendous defensive feat (and/or epic failure on the part of the Oilers, depending on one's POV.)

And by the way, the Oilers had appeared in the previous three postseasons, including giving NYI a tough six-game challenge in spring '81. So while they were not yet Cup pedigree, they were not the neophytes you suggest.


Last edited by Trottier: 06-14-2013 at 01:35 AM.
Trottier 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 03:02 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.