HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

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

What in hockey history does NOT heal all wounds?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-30-2013, 04:18 PM
  #201
Duffy13
‎(ノಥ益ಥ)ノ ┻━┻
 
Duffy13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: PEI, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 540
vCash: 500
I don't see anything wrong with Wings fans having the 09 finals as a wound that is unhealed... it was a huge missed opportunity for them to win back to back championships that hasn't been done since Edmonton in the late 80's(EDIT: MY PENS IN THE early 90's D'oh)... injuries, scheduling and whatever else that may have helped deny them that massively impressive claim is sure to cause them grief.

Obviously I am quite happy with that result, but I can definitely understand why Detroit fans would be unhappy and left with a sour taste in their mouths.

I love the Red Wings and was pretty happy with meeting them in the finals 2 years in row to be honest... such a great never say quit franchise to play against.


Last edited by Duffy13: 12-30-2013 at 04:28 PM. Reason: Because I'm STUPID
Duffy13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2013, 04:25 PM
  #202
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
I thought we were done too but I guess not because you continue to want to ignore the injuries in '09 when you summarize the two series. Datsyuk (top shelf talent himself and Hart candidate) was out for the first 4 games and far from 100% for the rest of the series. Lidstrom, Rafalski, Hossa, and Ericsson were all either playing with major injuries or recovering from injuries that prevented them from finishing the WCF. These were all well documented at the time and anyone who watched that team all season could see how much it affected them.

It's funny that you say the Pens had more top shelf talent when it was Talbot who scored both goals in game 7 and Crosby got shut down in the series. It was so close and one team was completely banged up. Therefore, to me, your summary is weak and very misleading, like it always has been and that's my whole issue with your posts and you still don't seem to understand that. You can't summarize the '09 series without mentioning the injuries. Maybe the Wings still wouldn't have won, who knows, but it was certainly a huge storyline in the series and for some reason you do your best to ignore it. If I'm going to summarize the '06 finals, how could I not mention Roloson getting hurt? It's the same thing. Get it?
I "get it". But I guess I tend to focus on the actual results and the teams who did step up and win. You mentioned Roloson. That's true, him getting injured did hurt the Oilers. But Oiler fans say similar things as if we should almost give the Oilers partial credit just because he was out. Not true. The Canes were the better team over the Oilers, either way. I guess for me looking at the results is more important than wondering "what if". We can always wonder, but when it starts to take away from the team that actually won, then I have an issue. Nothing is wrong with wondering, but never take anything away from the true champs.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2013, 04:35 PM
  #203
Cruor
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffy13 View Post
I don't see anything wrong with Wings fans having the 09 finals as a wound that is unhealed... it was a huge missed opportunity for them to win back to back championships that hasn't been done since Edmonton in the late 80's(EDIT: MY PENS IN THE early 90's D'oh)...
Try the Red Wings in 97 and 98

Cruor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2013, 07:38 PM
  #204
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I "get it". But I guess I tend to focus on the actual results and the teams who did step up and win. You mentioned Roloson. That's true, him getting injured did hurt the Oilers. But Oiler fans say similar things as if we should almost give the Oilers partial credit just because he was out. Not true. The Canes were the better team over the Oilers, either way. I guess for me looking at the results is more important than wondering "what if". We can always wonder, but when it starts to take away from the team that actually won, then I have an issue. Nothing is wrong with wondering, but never take anything away from the true champs.
Oilers fans can continue to bring up Roloson getting hurt in '06 because it was a huge factor in that series and they will always be left wondering. Are we supposed to analyze that series and just forget that their starting goalie got hurt? No one says the Cup should have been awarded to the Oilers anyways or any nonsense like that so there's no point to even go there. All we do on here is analyze and revisit the past so what's wrong with doing that with major injuries that definitely affected a series or game? You can't pick and choose when to analyze and when not to.

Again, it's okay for you to do a "what if" with Malkin in '08, which is a very weak "what if" because it basically amounts to "well, he didn't play well enough", but it's not okay to do a "what if" with the Wings in '09 for a more legitimate case of injuries to several key players. You can't have it both ways and you obviously haven't been consistent.

Now you're also claiming the Pens had more top end talent as well. I think it's fair to say that Zetterberg outplayed Crosby in their match up both years. I think it's also fair to say that a healthy Datsyuk and Malkin were a wash at that time. Now, who on the Pens matches up with Lidstrom? No one. How about Hossa and Franzen? Maybe Kunitz but back then he wasn't quite the player he is now. I think you're off base with this point as well and health was a bigger factor than a difference in top end talent.

You can say I'm trying to take something away from the Pens but I can also say you're taking something away from the Wings. I was never as proud of them as those finals cause they had no business getting to game 7 considering the injuries and schedule they faced. Yet what I hear from you is the Pens were hungrier. In some sense I can admit they were probably hungrier and more motivated because they wanted to get revenge and win the Cup while the Wings were obviously just trying to repeat. At the same time, the Wings had to overcome a lot more to get to game 7. They could have packed it in and blamed it on injuries but they battled right to the end in a very professional way. To simply point to the Pens being hungrier and not mention the huge difference in health between the two teams is not fair to Detroit. If the Pens were so much hungrier and their top players were also better then why did it even take them 7 games to put away a Wings team that limped into the finals like they did? It doesn't add up.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2013, 11:52 PM
  #205
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Oilers fans can continue to bring up Roloson getting hurt in '06 because it was a huge factor in that series and they will always be left wondering. Are we supposed to analyze that series and just forget that their starting goalie got hurt? No one says the Cup should have been awarded to the Oilers anyways or any nonsense like that so there's no point to even go there. All we do on here is analyze and revisit the past so what's wrong with doing that with major injuries that definitely affected a series or game? You can't pick and choose when to analyze and when not to.

Again, it's okay for you to do a "what if" with Malkin in '08, which is a very weak "what if" because it basically amounts to "well, he didn't play well enough", but it's not okay to do a "what if" with the Wings in '09 for a more legitimate case of injuries to several key players. You can't have it both ways and you obviously haven't been consistent.

Now you're also claiming the Pens had more top end talent as well. I think it's fair to say that Zetterberg outplayed Crosby in their match up both years. I think it's also fair to say that a healthy Datsyuk and Malkin were a wash at that time. Now, who on the Pens matches up with Lidstrom? No one. How about Hossa and Franzen? Maybe Kunitz but back then he wasn't quite the player he is now. I think you're off base with this point as well and health was a bigger factor than a difference in top end talent.

You can say I'm trying to take something away from the Pens but I can also say you're taking something away from the Wings. I was never as proud of them as those finals cause they had no business getting to game 7 considering the injuries and schedule they faced. Yet what I hear from you is the Pens were hungrier. In some sense I can admit they were probably hungrier and more motivated because they wanted to get revenge and win the Cup while the Wings were obviously just trying to repeat. At the same time, the Wings had to overcome a lot more to get to game 7. They could have packed it in and blamed it on injuries but they battled right to the end in a very professional way. To simply point to the Pens being hungrier and not mention the huge difference in health between the two teams is not fair to Detroit. If the Pens were so much hungrier and their top players were also better then why did it even take them 7 games to put away a Wings team that limped into the finals like they did? It doesn't add up.
I think if you were to ask who were the top two centers in the game in 2009 people would have said Crosby and Malkin. Maybe they say that in 2013 unless Stamkos is in there somewhere. Just saying. The Pens had great top end talent.

The better teams won in 2008 and 2009, I'll simplify that. We can bring up excuses but the truth is the better teams won. The Pens did not look good at all in their first two losses to Detroit in 2008. In 2009 they played better than the Wings in their first two losses but still lost. They were a year older, a year wiser, etc. More seasoned. More prepared and more hungry. They won a Game 7 in Washington against the Hart winner and against the defending Cup champs. If that isn't hungrier..........

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 08:46 AM
  #206
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I think if you were to ask who were the top two centers in the game in 2009 people would have said Crosby and Malkin. Maybe they say that in 2013 unless Stamkos is in there somewhere. Just saying. The Pens had great top end talent.
Of course they had great top end talent, but Detroit did too. Only Detroit was missing one of their guys. Look at the stat lines for that series:

Malkin 8 points, even
Zetterberg 6 points, +3
Crosby 3 points, -3 (in 6.5 games)
Datsyuk 2 points, +1 (in 3 games)

Everyone knows Z matched up with Crosby and he won that battle. Malkin was huge in that series but guess what, the Hart nominee and Selke winner he would have matched up against missed the first 4 games and when Datsyuk returned he didn't even play centre cause he was playing hurt. This throws a wrench into your simple, "Pens had more top end talent" summary, doesn't it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
The better teams won in 2008 and 2009, I'll simplify that. We can bring up excuses but the truth is the better teams won. The Pens did not look good at all in their first two losses to Detroit in 2008. In 2009 they played better than the Wings in their first two losses but still lost. They were a year older, a year wiser, etc. More seasoned. More prepared and more hungry. They won a Game 7 in Washington against the Hart winner and against the defending Cup champs. If that isn't hungrier..........
The better teams in those series won under the circumstances, I have no problem with that because that's what happened. I just have an issue with the revisionist history being presented as to WHY the Pens won in '09. You can't just say they were better without at least acknowledging their opponent was missing a Hart finalist for most of the series. Imagine if Crosby was the guy who was hurt? We'd hear far more about that, I'm sure. I'd put money on Bettman (and NBC) waiting the 8 days to start the series, lol, in hopes that Sid would miss less games. Instead we got 3 games in 4 days, which was ridiculous.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 09:24 AM
  #207
Ret
Registered User
 
Ret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: North York, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Gretzky's non call in 93
Gelinas' non goal in 04
2011 WJC finals and 2013 bronze medal game
Conklin's blunder in the 06 finals
Game 7 collapse against the Bruins

Ret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 09:37 AM
  #208
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Maurice Richard Punching a referee and being suspended.It cost the habs a stanley cup and millions of dollars of damage.Just sayin

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 11:33 AM
  #209
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
The better teams in those series won under the circumstances, I have no problem with that because that's what happened. I just have an issue with the revisionist history being presented as to WHY the Pens won in '09. You can't just say they were better without at least acknowledging their opponent was missing a Hart finalist for most of the series. Imagine if Crosby was the guy who was hurt? We'd hear far more about that, I'm sure. I'd put money on Bettman (and NBC) waiting the 8 days to start the series, lol, in hopes that Sid would miss less games. Instead we got 3 games in 4 days, which was ridiculous.
So what do you want to do in these situations? Go back in every season in NHL history and claim "that's not fair" because a Cup runner-up wasn't as healthy? 1955 Habs missed Richard. 1972 Rangers were missing Pearson Trophy winner Ratelle. Howe was missing in 1950 although the Red Wings won by the skin of their teeth. All three had better years than Datsyuk. Your post still cries sour grapes, I don't know how you don't see this. For whatever reason the schedule benefitted Detroit. I would guarantee after Game 2 you had no problem with back to back games am I right?

We really can't predict how Datsyuk would have fared if healthy in 2009. At this time he had one playoff year (2008) where we didn't call him a choker. You have to remember, Datsyuk was thought to be very Thornton-like prior to 2008 in the postseason. Does the 2008 version of Datsyuk show up or the previous years? No one knows, which is why I prefer to judge what happened on the ice. Would the Pens have stepped up even more if he were playing? Would Kunitz or Staal or someone played a bigger role? Or Letang? Or Gonchar? We don't know how the other team would react. We do know that a much less seasoned Pens team took a healthy Wings team to 6 games the previous year. They earned their Cup in 2009 and this is taking into account that we don't know the other injuries even the Pens players had. Heck, Crosby was knocked out of Game 7 for crying out loud with a hit! This is where people come together and step up (hello Max Talbot). You see what I mean?

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 12:42 PM
  #210
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
So what do you want to do in these situations? Go back in every season in NHL history and claim "that's not fair" because a Cup runner-up wasn't as healthy? 1955 Habs missed Richard. 1972 Rangers were missing Pearson Trophy winner Ratelle. Howe was missing in 1950 although the Red Wings won by the skin of their teeth. All three had better years than Datsyuk. Your post still cries sour grapes, I don't know how you don't see this. For whatever reason the schedule benefitted Detroit. I would guarantee after Game 2 you had no problem with back to back games am I right?
More nonsense. No one says "it's not fair" or is trying to retroactively award Cups. That doesn't make sense. What does make sense is remembering history correctly and mentioning these injuries so people can properly consider the circumstances.

All I ask is that people like you don't completely forget what actually happened and that injuries were a factor. How can you possibly summarize a series and not mention one of the top players in the world was injured for it? The fact that you mention these other injuries shows you are capable of remembering and mentioning it.

I was happy my team won games 1 and 2 but I was very concerned with how they looked. They looked gassed, specifically Zetterberg who had to play huge minutes cause Datysuk was out. I was proud of them for gritting out those games but that wasn't the team I watched all season, that was an injured and drained group.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
We really can't predict how Datsyuk would have fared if healthy in 2009. At this time he had one playoff year (2008) where we didn't call him a choker. You have to remember, Datsyuk was thought to be very Thornton-like prior to 2008 in the postseason. Does the 2008 version of Datsyuk show up or the previous years? No one knows, which is why I prefer to judge what happened on the ice. Would the Pens have stepped up even more if he were playing? Would Kunitz or Staal or someone played a bigger role? Or Letang? Or Gonchar? We don't know how the other team would react. We do know that a much less seasoned Pens team took a healthy Wings team to 6 games the previous year. They earned their Cup in 2009 and this is taking into account that we don't know the other injuries even the Pens players had. Heck, Crosby was knocked out of Game 7 for crying out loud with a hit! This is where people come together and step up (hello Max Talbot). You see what I mean?
Sorry but you're digging a deeper hole for yourself here, displaying you really don't know what you're talking about. Datsyuk was great in the '07 playoffs (16 points, getting to the WCF). Niedermayer and Pronger were having fits trying to stop him in '07 and if Schneider and Kronwall (#2 and #3 dmen) were healthy, who knows how that series would have played out. He probably shouldn't have been playing in the '06 playoffs cause, again, he came back early from an injury and people called him a choker cause he hadn't scored in X number of playoff games. He also helped them win a Cup in '02 as a rookie, playing with Hull and Devereaux. You listened to the masses that called him a playoff choker but it was completely exaggerated and he proved everyone wrong by '07.

Of course we don't know what would have happened if Datsyuk was healthy. All I ask is that you try to be fair to both teams in your analysis. You weren't fair in the past so I called you out on it.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 01:26 PM
  #211
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,642
vCash: 500
I'm not sure what you saw, but I saw the Red Wings in 2008 at their peak. There was a slight drop in 2009 in my opinion. The Pens on the other hand were better in 2009 than in 2008. That's how I saw it. The unfortunate injury to Datsyuk is just that - unfortunate. That's hockey.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 05:52 PM
  #212
agentblack
Registered User
 
agentblack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 8,345
vCash: 50
I love Patty Roy and all but...
his game 6 gaffe against DET in the conf. finals in 02 I dont think Ill ever get over.
That and Hartley trying to get a 5 on 3 by calling an illegal stick on Hasek was just so EMBARASSING.

agentblack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2014, 12:15 PM
  #213
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I'm not sure what you saw, but I saw the Red Wings in 2008 at their peak. There was a slight drop in 2009 in my opinion. The Pens on the other hand were better in 2009 than in 2008. That's how I saw it. The unfortunate injury to Datsyuk is just that - unfortunate. That's hockey.
I agree the '09 team was less machine-like (defense and puck possession) than '08 even though they should have been better on paper.

The Wings added Hossa and the Pens lost Hossa, who was arguably the Pens best player in the '09 finals, so that should have been a big swing in Detroit's favour. However, Hossa was playing hurt, Rafalski was playing hurt, Lidstrom and Ericsson didn't finish the WCF due to injuries, and of course there's Datsyuk. While Datsyuk's injury was unfortunate for the Wings, it was very fortunate for the Pens. Either way, I agree that is (playoff) hockey.

So...injuries still appear to be be a bigger factor and difference than anything else. My point remains and will continue to remain, if you are going to review/analyze this topic it would only be fair to mention that one team was injury riddled and missing one of the top players in the world for most of the series. Otherwise, don't bother talking about it cause you are just skewing reality and history. That is all.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2014, 02:28 PM
  #214
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
I agree the '09 team was less machine-like (defense and puck possession) than '08 even though they should have been better on paper.

The Wings added Hossa and the Pens lost Hossa, who was arguably the Pens best player in the '09 finals, so that should have been a big swing in Detroit's favour. However, Hossa was playing hurt, Rafalski was playing hurt, Lidstrom and Ericsson didn't finish the WCF due to injuries, and of course there's Datsyuk. While Datsyuk's injury was unfortunate for the Wings, it was very fortunate for the Pens. Either way, I agree that is (playoff) hockey.

So...injuries still appear to be be a bigger factor and difference than anything else. My point remains and will continue to remain, if you are going to review/analyze this topic it would only be fair to mention that one team was injury riddled and missing one of the top players in the world for most of the series. Otherwise, don't bother talking about it cause you are just skewing reality and history. That is all.
That's fair, but you can mention it without downgrading the team that actually won. Sometimes that is the tone I hear from Wings fans about this topic. They aren't the first, and they aren't the last hobbled team to play in the Cup final with injuries.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2014, 02:32 PM
  #215
cupcrazyman
42 Long
 
cupcrazyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Leafland
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,861
vCash: 500
Happy Harold Ballard

cupcrazyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2014, 03:37 PM
  #216
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 29,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupcrazyman View Post
Happy Harold Ballard
I'll second that one. Spent close to 30yrs methodically destroying everything Smythe, Selke, Davidson & many others had built up. Turned off & lost forever generations of Leafs & just generally hockey fans, disgracing the colors, the emblem & logo. On the other hand.... he was a benevolent individual, generous with charities & did genuinely love the game & the Leafs but my God, what can you say really? A number of franchise owners of the same ilk through the mid to late 20th century, early 21st. Money doesnt buy class.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2014, 05:16 PM
  #217
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Eye Monster Invictus
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 61,666
vCash: 500
Nothing will undo the damage done to my cardiovascular system by Michael ****ing Leighton and Bryzgalov. The blood pressure increase during games has turned my arteries to stone.

__________________
Saturday night, I like to raise a little harm. I'll sleep when I'm dead.
Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2014, 10:12 AM
  #218
rfournier103
Registered User
 
rfournier103's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ceti Alpha V
Posts: 868
vCash: 500
If I were older, (as a Bruins fan) I would say the infamous "too many men on the ice" game vs. Montreal.

I'm not sure I have one for hockey...

I guess there have been years that the Bruins have crapped out in the playoffs, but it's usually been to better teams. The playoff collapse against the Flyers was VERY upsetting, but the Stanley Cup win in 2011 was good medicine for that.

I've always been disappointed that Ray Bourque and Cam Neely never won the Stanley Cup in Boston as players, but it hasn't kept me up at night or anything... And the Bruins' loss in the Finals to Chicago wasn't heartbreaking for me. Chicago was good, and the Bruins were so banged up... I just knew it wasn't their year. It's not like there's a huge blood-feud with the Blackhawks...

The Patriots' Super Bowl XLII loss to the Giants is by far and away the worst sports wound I've ever had; and hasn't gone away yet...

rfournier103 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 04:35 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.