HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Brayden Schenn

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-26-2014, 09:37 PM
  #751
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripod View Post
And Jake would not be my choice either. Simmonds, I would bite the bullet on and do.
Well that's likely what Nashville would ask for. I don't think they would ask for Simmonds because he likely would be a bad fit there & wouldn't be nearly successful there as he is here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripod View Post
Then take B.Schenn and put him on RW.
That sounds like a disaster, you want to take a player who's never really played wing before in his entire career in general & switch him to his off wing?


Last edited by LegionOfDoom91: 05-26-2014 at 09:43 PM.
LegionOfDoom91 is offline  
Old
05-26-2014, 10:11 PM
  #752
kyuss
Registered User
 
kyuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 384
vCash: 500
The UFA and trade market for defensemen is completely skewed these days. Amac isn't worth his nut, Carle certainly isn't worth 5.5 or whatever he's not really earning, Gonchar and Wideman aren't worth their treasures...and Josi isn't worth Simmonds.

I don't care how strong you think the Flyers forward depth is, Josi is no savior, and Simmonds is too important to his team.

In the C to W conversion sweepstakes: Why not switch Vinny with Jake? Vinny could poor-man's Jagr his way through a productive season while Jake could definitely help Schenn.


Last edited by kyuss: 05-26-2014 at 10:12 PM. Reason: style
kyuss is offline  
Old
05-26-2014, 10:24 PM
  #753
kyuss
Registered User
 
kyuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 384
vCash: 500
In regard to the Josi talk, I forgot to ask this question: If Hextall trades Jake or Schenn or Simmonds for a plus skating D
--who steps in the forwards role from the farm? Anyone we can expect to see as a Flyer in the next two seasons?

Now, If Streit, Amac, or Coburn or any penciled-in starter is lost for a multitude of games, do you have a prospect in mind to jump in? Even if you aren't confident in that prospect, are you excited to see them play?


Last edited by kyuss: 05-26-2014 at 10:26 PM. Reason: style again
kyuss is offline  
Old
05-26-2014, 11:22 PM
  #754
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 4,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
Rangers aren't a very good team regardless of what they are doing. It just so happens that the whole east sucks outside of Boston. They should consider themselves lucky that the Canadiens match up so well against Boston.

This is actually why I'm upset. The Flyers lost in game 7 by one goal. The next round would have been the Pens which I could definitely see the Flyers winning and then Mtl who the Flyers dominate. Much like 2010 it would have been a tough series in the midst of some favorable match ups for the Flyers.
As the posters below have already mentioned, this is a whole lot of ******** and assumptions The Rangers are a great team, as exhibited both by where they are now and by their play in the regular season, especially the latter part of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfan187 View Post
The Rangers aren't a very good team? I personally think they will give LA or Chi a run for their money for the Cup. The Rangers are overall a very solid team with great defense and a top goaltender.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 46zone View Post
I agree, I felt the Rangers were the second best team in the East entering the playoffs. They, like the Flyers, came on strong after a poor start to the season. Though, I will admit the conference is mediocre as a whole. They're a well coached team and I think their forwards are good enough with their great defensive unit and elite goaltending. The Rangers will not be a cakewalk for the Blackhawks/Kings.
Agreed, I, too, think it will not be an easy series for either of those two teams. Assuming the Rangers first make it to the finals, of course. This is something that is also not really set in stone yet.

Ryker is offline  
Old
05-26-2014, 11:41 PM
  #755
Striiker
Orange and Black
 
Striiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryker View Post
As the posters below have already mentioned, this is a whole lot of ******** and assumptions The Rangers are a great team, as exhibited both by where they are now and by their play in the regular season, especially the latter part of it.



Agreed, I, too, think it will not be an easy series for either of those two teams. Assuming the Rangers first make it to the finals, of course. This is something that is also not really set in stone yet.
They're really not, it's easy to just look at where they are in the playoffs right now and think that they are but if you know what you're talking about then it's pretty obvious that they aren't.

They barely squeak past us when we're forced to use our horrible backup for 5/7 games, they squeak past the Pens who are playoff chokers, and now again they're playing the Habs without their starting goalie. The Rangers are incredibly lucky to be where they are since pretty much all the luck has gone their way.

Striiker is online now  
Old
05-26-2014, 11:47 PM
  #756
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 4,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Striiker View Post
They're really not, it's easy to just look at where they are in the playoffs right now and think that they are but if you know what you're talking about then it's pretty obvious that they aren't.

They barely squeak past us when we're forced to use our horrible backup for 5/7 games, they squeak past the Pens who are playoff chokers, and now again they're playing the Habs without their starting goalie. The Rangers are incredibly lucky to be where they are since pretty much all the luck has gone their way.
Haha, you're living in some fantasy world, aren't you? You remind me of a Habs fan who was predicting the Pens would beat us a couple of years ago, and who then wasn't man enough to admit he was wrong and that the Flyers were just the better team. Instead, he said the Pens' defense played horrible and was making all kinds of excuses, which I guess were supposed to show me how he was most certainly right in saying the Pens are better, but that such unfortunate circumstances just couldn't be predicted.

Oh, and as for those playoff chokers, I believe the analogous thread on their boards would be "5 and counting..."

Ryker is offline  
Old
05-26-2014, 11:54 PM
  #757
kyuss
Registered User
 
kyuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 384
vCash: 500
I thought this was the Schenn thread in my earlier posts, but I guess someone should change the title and put up a poll Q) "What Would The Rangers Do If Mason Started Round One?"

My A) They would lose round one.

kyuss is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 12:23 AM
  #758
Striiker
Orange and Black
 
Striiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryker View Post
Haha, you're living in some fantasy world, aren't you? You remind me of a Habs fan who was predicting the Pens would beat us a couple of years ago, and who then wasn't man enough to admit he was wrong and that the Flyers were just the better team. Instead, he said the Pens' defense played horrible and was making all kinds of excuses, which I guess were supposed to show me how he was most certainly right in saying the Pens are better, but that such unfortunate circumstances just couldn't be predicted.

Oh, and as for those playoff chokers, I believe the analogous thread on their boards would be "5 and counting..."
Based on this post, your response to my post in the other thread, and my impression from your posts in general, it seems like you're the one in the fantasy world. One that doesn't include any kind of hockey knowledge or common sense.

Striiker is online now  
Old
05-27-2014, 12:33 AM
  #759
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 4,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Striiker View Post
Based on this post, your response to my post in the other thread, and my impression from your posts in general, it seems like you're the one in the fantasy world. One that doesn't include any kind of hockey knowledge or common sense.
I guess you're right. From now on, whenever someone does something well, I'll just discredit it and ascribe it to luck. I gotta say you made me feel a lot better about myself now. Now I know I'm the best and that if someone else does something better, what can you do. Can't counter pure luck and choking.

Ryker is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 12:40 AM
  #760
Striiker
Orange and Black
 
Striiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryker View Post
I guess you're right. From now on, whenever someone does something well, I'll just discredit it and ascribe it to luck. I gotta say you made me feel a lot better about myself now. Now I know I'm the best and that if someone else does something better, what can you do. Can't counter pure luck and choking.
... so you're saying it's not lucky that they've played against two teams with backup goalies (one of which has cement hips and the other is a rookie who's played a grand total of 13 games in the NHL), the Penguins choked a 3-1 lead, and they avoided the Bruins? OK, that really says a lot about how much you know.

Striiker is online now  
Old
05-27-2014, 12:47 AM
  #761
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 4,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Striiker View Post
... so you're saying it's not lucky that they've played against two teams with backup goalies (one of which has cement hips and the other is a rookie who's played a grand total of 13 games in the NHL), the Penguins choked a 3-1 lead, and they avoided the Bruins? OK, that really says a lot about how much you know.
Yes, I'm saying the Rangers in the first round played a team that played a goalie they did not willingly sign and had full trust in. Yes, I'm saying Mason wasn't in net for the deciding game. Yes, I'm saying injuries never ever happen in sports and that whenever a team meets an opponent with injuries, they should just not get the win or the points, because they don't deserve them. I'm also saying a team that overcomes a difficult obstacle isn't actually good, it's just that the obstacle collapsed unto itself. Invariably. Because good play doesn't lead you anywhere. I'm also saying the Rangers must have been overjoyed with Marty's mum dying. Lastly, I'm saying Tokarski has been absolutely terrible and that there's just no way Price wouldn't be lights out better. Because as someone without experience Tokarski just has to be worse.

Is that what you wanted to hear?

Ryker is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 12:59 AM
  #762
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,903
vCash: 500
A lot of things went right for the Rangers, for sure, but anyone saying they're not a very good team is being ignorant.

They're a team with lots of offensive depth. Lots of speed. A franchise defender with a solid defensive supporting cast. And they have the best goalie in the world.

They're a very good team, and for the majority of the year, they underperformed. They underperformed against us, and they underperformed for half the series against the Pens. They've gotten to their game now, however.

During the regular season, they showed flashes of being a great team. Some nights they'd look like world beaters; others they would be extremely mediocre. They got very, very lucky for the first three weeks of the playoffs, but that luck didn't mask their flaws so much as it bought them time to bring out their strengths later on.


In a lot of ways, they are very similar to the 2009-10 Flyers. A great team on paper with high expectations that underperformed. They then got lucky in the playoffs before finally breaking out and showing what they were truly capable of. We should know very well what that's like. The Rags are a solid team. Yes, they are lucky to be where they are, but that doesn't mean they're not a good team. They are. The team we played in round one is not the team playing right now. For one, McDonagh was extremely pedestrian. He's now on top of his game. That's a huge boost.

They could very well give the Kings (or Hawks) a challenge. It won't be an easy series for the western champion.


EDIT: The Rangers have also been a very strong puck possession team all season. Not the be all, end all, but it shows that there could be (imo, is) an underlying foundation for success there rather than just dumb luck in the playoffs.


Last edited by hockeyfreak7: 05-27-2014 at 01:14 AM.
hockeyfreak7 is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 05:30 AM
  #763
FlyersFan61290
Registered User
 
FlyersFan61290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 9,656
vCash: 500
It's not ignorant. They're a good team but not a very good team. Maybe you and I have different definitions of very good but I think it's clear that the Rangers are a second tier team. I don't see how you can put them in the same category as Chicago, LA and Boston. ****, I think the Ducks are a better team too.

Rangers got hot at the right time. I mean, let's be honest they haven't look all that great outside of the last 7 games or so. They beat the Flyers (also not a very good team) in 7 with the backup in for 3 of the games. Then they took on a poorly run, known underachieving pens team who stuck to the script (bad goaltending and there best player not producing) again in 7 games.

FlyersFan61290 is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 06:02 AM
  #764
Tripod
Registered User
 
Tripod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
It's not ignorant. They're a good team but not a very good team. Maybe you and I have different definitions of very good but I think it's clear that the Rangers are a second tier team. I don't see how you can put them in the same category as Chicago, LA and Boston. ****, I think the Ducks are a better team too.

Rangers got hot at the right time. I mean, let's be honest they haven't look all that great outside of the last 7 games or so. They beat the Flyers (also not a very good team) in 7 with the backup in for 3 of the games. Then they took on a poorly run, known underachieving pens team who stuck to the script (bad goaltending and there best player not producing) again in 7 games.
And this is why the East is always wide open after Boston. If they get upset, anyone can win it. It could have been us, but wasn't.

Tripod is online now  
Old
05-27-2014, 06:41 AM
  #765
flyershockey
Registered User
 
flyershockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,226
vCash: 500
The Rangers didn't luck their way into anything. I don't care how many breaks they got, they still had/have to win 12 games to get to the finals. The Kings looked like crap in certain games in the first two rounds as well. All that matters is that they got it together when they needed to and advanced.

The Rangers don't blow anyone out, but that's in large part because they don't need to. They have the best defense left in the playoffs, and arguably the best goaltender in the world. They have no problem playing every game to a 2-1 score if need be. I kind of envy them for their ability to win in multiple ways. The Flyers are only successful when the offense puts up 3+ goals a night because their defense can't hack it and Mason can't constantly bail them out.

flyershockey is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 07:00 AM
  #766
FlyersFan61290
Registered User
 
FlyersFan61290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 9,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyershockey View Post
The Rangers didn't luck their way into anything. I don't care how many breaks they got, they still had/have to win 12 games to get to the finals. The Kings looked like crap in certain games in the first two rounds as well. All that matters is that they got it together when they needed to and advanced.

The Rangers don't blow anyone out, but that's in large part because they don't need to. They have the best defense left in the playoffs, and arguably the best goaltender in the world. They have no problem playing every game to a 2-1 score if need be. I kind of envy them for their ability to win in multiple ways. The Flyers are only successful when the offense puts up 3+ goals a night because their defense can't hack it and Mason can't constantly bail them out.
I didn't use the word luck, purposely. And LA has been consistently better.

FlyersFan61290 is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 07:27 AM
  #767
Striiker
Orange and Black
 
Striiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,887
vCash: 500
I think it's pretty obvious I wasn't saying they're where they are 100% by luck or that they're a horrible team...

BUT, you can't seriously say that they haven't had a lot of luck along the way or that they're as good as the Bruins, Kings, or Hawks... which was my point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyershockey View Post
The Rangers didn't luck their way into anything. I don't care how many breaks they got, they still had/have to win 12 games to get to the finals. The Kings looked like crap in certain games in the first two rounds as well. All that matters is that they got it together when they needed to and advanced.

The Rangers don't blow anyone out, but that's in large part because they don't need to. They have the best defense left in the playoffs, and arguably the best goaltender in the world. They have no problem playing every game to a 2-1 score if need be. I kind of envy them for their ability to win in multiple ways. The Flyers are only successful when the offense puts up 3+ goals a night because their defense can't hack it and Mason can't constantly bail them out.
They absolutely got very lucky along the way. Playing two teams that didn't have their starting goalies, the Pens being a choking joke, and avoiding the best team in the east isn't getting lucky? Give me a break.

And the bolded shows that they're not a great team and that they're lucky to be where they are. If they were a top tier team they would have blown out at least one of the Flyers without Mason, the Penguins who have the king of playoff choking MAF and an MIA Crosby, or the Habs without Price. The fact is that even with all of those lucky breaks they've barely squeaked by the 1st and 2nd rounds in 7 games and who knows what's going to happen in this series, it was very close to being a 2-2 series.

Striiker is online now  
Old
05-27-2014, 07:37 AM
  #768
flyershockey
Registered User
 
flyershockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Striiker View Post
I think it's pretty obvious I wasn't saying they're where they are 100% by luck or that they're a horrible team...

BUT, you can't seriously say that they haven't had a lot of luck along the way or that they're as good as the Bruins, Kings, or Hawks... which was my point.



They absolutely got very lucky along the way. Playing two teams that didn't have their starting goalies, the Pens being a choking joke, and avoiding the best team in the east isn't getting lucky? Give me a break.

And the bolded shows that they're not a great team and that they're lucky to be where they are. If they were a top tier team they would have blown out at least one of the Flyers without Mason, the Penguins who have the king of playoff choking MAF and an MIA Crosby, or the Habs without Price. The fact is that even with all of those lucky breaks they've barely squeaked by the 1st and 2nd rounds in 7 games and who knows what's going to happen in this series, it was very close to being a 2-2 series.
Let's be honest here for a moment. The Flyers took the Rangers to 7 games, but that series was pretty well carried by the Rangers. Then they played two 100+ point teams. Price's injury sucks, but him being out is not the reason the Rangers are winning the series. They're winning because they're controlling the play in all three zones of the ice. You can argue all you want about the Pens choke, but it takes a team playing well on the other side for that collapse to happen. It's not like the Penguins took the final three games of the series off. The Rangers took it from them.

I think your issue is with how weak the East was overall this year, and not so much with the Rangers. I'd give them a good shot to beat the Kings if that is indeed the matchup. Their defense and goaltending is good enough to win a series by itself, which they've been doing since the playoffs started. I would have given them the edge against Boston as well, considering they played like crap against Montreal. It's ok to admit that the Rangers are a good team. They're certainly much better than the NJ team that got to the finals in 2012.

flyershockey is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 07:52 AM
  #769
Striiker
Orange and Black
 
Striiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyershockey View Post
Let's be honest here for a moment. The Flyers took the Rangers to 7 games, but that series was pretty well carried by the Rangers. Then they played two 100+ point teams. Price's injury sucks, but him being out is not the reason the Rangers are winning the series. They're winning because they're controlling the play in all three zones of the ice. You can argue all you want about the Pens choke, but it takes a team playing well on the other side for that collapse to happen. It's not like the Penguins took the final three games of the series off. The Rangers took it from them.

I think your issue is with how weak the East was overall this year, and not so much with the Rangers. I'd give them a good shot to beat the Kings if that is indeed the matchup. Their defense and goaltending is good enough to win a series by itself, which they've been doing since the playoffs started. I would have given them the edge against Boston as well, considering they played like crap against Montreal. It's ok to admit that the Rangers are a good team. They're certainly much better than the NJ team that got to the finals in 2012.
Doesn't that seem like it supports my argument though? They had to go to 7 games against the Flyers even thought they were without Mason and they didn't play especially well (and I absolutely believe the Flyers have a very good chance to win if Mason plays every game because Emery got exposed badly all series and when Mason came back he outplayed Hank... the Flyers just play better in front of Mason than Emery too), then the Penguins were never a legit contender for the cup because they have a lot of players who are mentally weak and choke under pressure plus no depth, and again the Habs squeak past the Bruins even though they're a weaker team and now they lose their starting goalie and it's still been a semi-close series since it was 1 goal away from being 2-2. The Rangers have had so many breaks that should have allowed them to breeze straight through the playoffs to the finals if they were actually as great of a team as some people are saying, but they didn't. They're fighting and clawing their way through the series on even footing with teams that are at serious disadvantages.

I'm not saying they're a bad team, but I absolutely disagree that they're a top tier team. The east was weak this year and the Rangers are part of that weakness, if they weren't they would've just ran through all these other "weak" teams.

Striiker is online now  
Old
05-27-2014, 08:13 AM
  #770
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,522
vCash: 500
The Flyers played in front of Mason for 4 games in the series against the Rangers and went 2-2.

BernieParent is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 08:18 AM
  #771
The Rage Kage
Registered User
 
The Rage Kage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,208
vCash: 500
But game 3 mason could have won for us

The Rage Kage is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 08:19 AM
  #772
tymed
Registered User
 
tymed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOfDoom91 View Post
That sounds like a disaster, you want to take a player who's never really played wing before in his entire career in general & switch him to his off wing?
If were forcing him to the wing, he makes a better RW than LW for a lot of reasons.

tymed is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 08:24 AM
  #773
46zone
Guttersnipe
 
46zone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BernieParent View Post
The Flyers played in front of Mason for 4 games in the series against the Rangers and went 2-2.
Exactly, the Rangers dictated most of the play regardless of who was in net for the Flyers.

46zone is offline  
Old
05-27-2014, 08:30 AM
  #774
Striiker
Orange and Black
 
Striiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,887
vCash: 500
Yeah, for some reason I thought Mason was out longer. Anyway, I still think they win the series if he's in from the beginning. They were much better in front of him than they were in front of Emery in addition to the massive goaltending difference.

Striiker is online now  
Old
05-27-2014, 12:30 PM
  #775
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 4,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
It's not ignorant. They're a good team but not a very good team. Maybe you and I have different definitions of very good but I think it's clear that the Rangers are a second tier team. I don't see how you can put them in the same category as Chicago, LA and Boston. ****, I think the Ducks are a better team too.
So... in the regular season, the Rangers beat the Blackhawks on both occasions and split the games with the Kings. They lost all games against the Ducks and the Bruins. So what exactly is your argument that they're not in the same category as, say, the Kings based on? Gut feeling? Hatred towards the Rangers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
Rangers got hot at the right time.
The Kings seem to get hot at the right time every season for the past three years, but you have no trouble admitting they're a top tier team. Why the double standards?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
I mean, let's be honest they haven't look all that great outside of the last 7 games or so.
I thought good teams were determined by their results, not a consensus on who looks good achieved by fans of rival teams. Seriously, who cares how they looked to you? When I hate a player, but then see him producing or playing well, I don't close my eyes. I look at the facts and reconsider my stance towards him. Same with teams. You seem to stick to whatever feels comfortable and interpret the facts accordingly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
They beat the Flyers (also not a very good team) in 7 with the backup in for 3 of the games.
Yeah, they beat the Flyers who willingly signed Emery and implemented him into the team, knowing he could possibly start a significant amount of games if Mason gets injured. In other words, they defeated the Flyers as they were built from the get-go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
Then they took on a poorly run, known underachieving pens team who stuck to the script (bad goaltending and there best player not producing) again in 7 games.
And then lastly they stumble upon the Habs team who sticks to the script of having a fragile goalie and their best players (Gionta, Plekanec, Vanek) not producing, right? It can't have anything to do with the shutting them down, can it? No, that would be giving them too much credit.

This whole argument is based on the inability of some of you guys to face the facts when they are presented to you, and reconsider your opinions on a particular matter. As I said, you instead interpret them in your own way and make all kinds of accommodations in the vein of "yeah, they won, but they didn't look good" (as if points are awarded for looking good) or "yeah, they won, but Crosby didn't produce against them not because they were good, but because he was bad".

In terms of that last point, I wonder if you in particular ever give credit to Couturier for shutting Malkin, or anyone else for that matter, down. By your logic, you certainly shouldn't, because it's not him doing a good job, it's always the opponents choking when they face him. I have as much to go on to form that opinion as you do for your choking stories. But that's fine, this year we might have two "not very good teams" in the Stanley Cup playoffs. From the West comes a team that stumbled upon known chokers San Jose in the first round, then played a team with an injured (Andersen), shaky (Hiller) or inexperienced (Gibson - even less NHL experience than Tokarski, holy crap!) goalie, and in the conference finals faced the Blackhawks who, luckily for the Kings, just ran out of energy from having won two Cups in the past four years and consequently choked (obviously), as well. You've already aptly described the luck of the team coming from the East.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BernieParent View Post
The Flyers played in front of Mason for 4 games in the series against the Rangers and went 2-2.
Clearly, if they knew deep down that Mason would be available for more than a total of 4 out of possible 7, that would've been 3-1 or 4-0.

Ryker 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 04:48 PM.

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.