Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, February 24, 2014

OT: The NHL is finally back thread, part 2

Now that the Olympics are over it’s time for the important Hockey to restart.

odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: February 24, 2014 at 05:54 PM | 984 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: hockey, nhl, off topic, only thing canada is good at

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 9 of 10 pages ‹ First  < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > 
   801. Langer Monk Posted: June 01, 2014 at 10:53 PM (#4717099)
Flip for overtime. And I'm going to see the Matteau clip a few more times the next week, aren't I?
   802. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 01, 2014 at 10:54 PM (#4717100)
Time for a street fight under the thin guise of a hockey game!
   803. Random Transaction Generator Posted: June 01, 2014 at 11:12 PM (#4717104)
OWN GOAL!
   804. zack Posted: June 01, 2014 at 11:14 PM (#4717107)
Well that was a crap ending. Oh well. Funny that such a great game featured almost exclusively fluke goals.
   805. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: June 01, 2014 at 11:14 PM (#4717108)
Well at least one LA sports team is playing well this year.
   806. Bull Pain Posted: June 01, 2014 at 11:16 PM (#4717110)
Williams slashed leddy's stick out of his hands to set the winner up. It allowed him to easily get to the puck first.
   807. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 01, 2014 at 11:22 PM (#4717113)
Welp, now Bill Simmons can pretend to be a hockey fan for a few weeks again. So there's that.

And Gary Bettman probably had to run downstairs for a fresh pair of pants as soon as the New York-LA Finals was clinched. So there's that, too.
   808. Shredder Posted: June 01, 2014 at 11:22 PM (#4717114)
Great series. I apologize to all the Hawks fan I offended.
   809. Howie Menckel Posted: June 01, 2014 at 11:55 PM (#4717126)

first NY-LA fimal since NYY-LAD 1981

I spent a lot of time in LA just before NJN-LAK Finals asking folks if that counted, too. I don't recall meeting a single LA person who seemed to be able to locate NJ on a map - so, no.
   810. ursus arctos Posted: June 02, 2014 at 12:02 AM (#4717130)
Rangers should invite Willis and Reggie to their first two home games.
   811. The Kentucky Gentleman, Mark Edward Posted: June 02, 2014 at 12:07 AM (#4717131)
Really would've liked to see the Hawks play their 12 best forwards in the organization during this series but hey I'm sure Bollig was doing some productive stuff in the 2 minutes and 28 seconds he played.
   812. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 02, 2014 at 02:23 AM (#4717147)
Matt Greene +3 and two assists in Game 7! How random.

I guess I'm going downtown on Wednesday.

Oh helllll naw. You played this for the last two series, no way are you getting away with it again!

I'm going to keep going to the well until the Cup is back here in Manhattan Beach.
   813. zack Posted: June 02, 2014 at 11:50 AM (#4717320)
I can't believe how many 'hawks fans are casting last night as some abject failure. The entire series, and especially the scoring in that last game, was the very definition of a coin flip. And it's not like they lost to some scrub team, the Kings and Hawks are indistinguishable as the best team in the league.

Maybe I'm just weird that I've always thought the best you could ask for out of team construction was to make the final four. Anything beyond that requires not just a great team but also huge doses of luck.

Kings in 6. Go Rags, but only 'cause I'd like the 'hawks to be the only team with 2 cups post-lockout.
   814. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 02, 2014 at 11:57 AM (#4717325)
My thoughts on the series/season are going to stretch across the following 3 posts. The first one will be my reacting immaturely, and purely emotionally, with some snark, and then I'll be done with that. The next post will be a rational reaction to the series. And the third will be overall thoughts on the upcoming offseason.

The Kings should, and likely will, destroy the Rangers. I cannot root for the Rangers, but I'm also not going to root for the Kings. However, I will get some level of satisfaction if the Rangers were to win, thanks to these uncredited posts:
Congratulations, Hawks. go Rangers.

I'm not watching tonight's game or DVRing it. I'll check the score before bed. Game 6 was crushing, I'm not doing that again.

Meh. I'll be rooting for the Rangers.

Well, looks like I just became a big Blackhawks fan. The Kings team from the first three Sharks games is back. Pathetic effort from a team that won the Cup two years ago. Passive, indecisive, and basically just letting themselves get pushed around.

I'd root for the Hawks over the Sharks. I'll root for any team that's already won the cup over the Sharks. I'd rather see the Blues beat the Hawks. But ultimately, I'm rooting for every team still playing over the Sharks.

Holy crap, this Kings team is awful. I'm actually rooting for the Ducks now. Anyone but San Jose would be fine with me.


Bunch of whiny ass, fickle fans. Maybe Shredder will actually learn what a dive is this series. And this bandwagon bullshit should die, considering the fact that the NHL would have preferred the Hawks in the finals over the Kings. And the actual date you're looking for the support changing is September 26, 2007.
   815. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 02, 2014 at 11:57 AM (#4717326)
I said all along the Kings and Hawks were really even teams. So it’s not a surprise that it went to a game 7 OT. It’s disappointing and deflating that the winning goal was so fluky, but so were a number of other fluky goals throughout the game.

To be completely honest, it doesn’t hurt as much as I think it should, partly because of the recent titles. But also because I can recognize the flaws the Hawks had, and that the Kings were just better than the Hawks. They were better for longer stretches of the series – from the 3rd period of game 2 through game 4 (save the first period of game 3), the Kings simply outclassed the Hawks. Doughty was the best player in the series (he didn’t have a great game 7, but he wasn’t terrible) and his play was a huge advantage for the Kings. The Hawks never really matched the skill up and down the Kings lineup – having Richards and his skill on the 4th line is a huge plus. Last year the Hawks were clearly faster than the Kings and were able to take advantage of the bottom six and slower defenders; that just wasn’t the case this year. The Kings were just as fast, and have always had the size advantage, so the Hawks had a smaller margin for error.

At the end, it didn’t really matter than neither Quick or Crawford were that great this series. The Hawks almost evened up the special teams play by the end of the series. Letting game 2 slip away and get out of hand might have been the difference in winning or losing.
   816. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 02, 2014 at 11:58 AM (#4717328)
I’ve talked before about the Hawks not being as deep this year as last, and here’s one way to illustrate that. The Hawks finally stumbled upon 3 lines that actually made sense, but it took until the second to last game of the playoffs. The Hawks kept their 3 worst forwards on the same line (Handzus, Versteeg/Brookbank, and Bollig) and then barely played that line. But even in that “ideal” top 9, you had guys playing roles that they probably aren’t good enough for. Kruger’s a great 4th line center, but might only be ok as a 3rd line guy. Ben Smith is a great effort guy, with a smidge of skill and some good luck, but he spent all year as a 4th liner and seemed to excel there; he was stretched to play second line center for long stretches. And the biggest example of how last year’s team was so much deeper is Shaw; he’s a fantastic energy wing with scoring touch, he’s in his head as a playmaking center on the 2nd line. The fact that the Kane/Saad/Shaw line took off seemed to have very little to do with Shaw and everything to do with Kane and Saad being made for each other.

That gets me to my next complaint – Q. I don’t want to overlook all the great things he does as a coach – the team totally believes in him and buys in, he gets a lot out of his players, and quite frankly he just wins a ton. But he deserves absolutely no credit for Kane finally breaking out when separated from Handzus. It was painfully obvious to everyone except Q that Zus was killing Kane’s game. Kane basically said as much after the line switch. The fact that it took almost 100 games for Q to realize (or admit) that is infuriating. I don’t really know if Morin or Regin or Pirri or Nordstrom really are that good, but I don’t know that Q does either. He had a very quick hook with all of them, and either his preference for Bollig/Handzus over them is a huge blind spot for Q or a problem for Bowman and building the roster.

I think a lot of people were surprised when Bowman resigned Handzus, but it wasn’t a huge deal and I don’t think the Hawks expected to have to rely on him that much. He may have overpaid to bring Bickell back, but again I can understand why they’d want someone like him and they don’t have a lot of other similar players to take his role. I am fine with Crawford, but also am in the camp that thinks that was a HUGE overpay. The Bollig extension is terrible, but I think they’re stuck with that one. I understand the thought behind bringing Versteeg back, but that move was clearly a bust. I totally agreed with letting Stahlberg walk, and trading Frolik and Bolland while they had value (and were overpaid for their roles). But I think it’s obvious now that Bowman didn’t do a very good job filling out the bottom of the roster this time (that’s also goes for backup goalie). The Hawks have had a center problem for some time now, and one that cannot be ignored again.

I want to see Teuvo get ample opportunity to thrive. Put him between Kane and Saad for an extended period and see whether he sinks or swims. If there’s a chance to get a proven top line center (say, a Kesler type), do it but still give Teuvo a line and let him grow. If Morin isn’t going to cut it – I don’t see why he wouldn’t be a positive in a bottom 6 role, actually get someone who will. It might be time to think about getting younger at a few positions (defense especially), and they need to determine if guys like Sharp and Hossa need to get more rest as they get older so they’re fresh in the playoffs; or worse, if they need to supplement scoring they’re no longer going to get from them.

There’s no reason to panic, and the core is still great. Don’t be the Bruins and overact and makes trades you’re going to regret. If the Hawks did nothing, there’d still be a good chance they’d be right back in the WCF against the Kings next year. They can, and should, definitely start doing some pre-emptive reshaping.
   817. Pooty Lederhosen Posted: June 02, 2014 at 12:13 PM (#4717351)
Don’t be the Bruins and overact and makes trades you’re going to regret.

Is this a reference to the Seguin trade? Because I'm not sure anyone on Lansdowne Street is regretting that one.
   818. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 02, 2014 at 12:17 PM (#4717354)
Perhaps they should. And if they don't regret it now, they will in the very near future.
   819. Shredder Posted: June 02, 2014 at 12:28 PM (#4717365)
Most of those were context driven, so to remove the posts around them completely removes the context.
   820. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:12 PM (#4717401)
Letting game 2 slip away and get out of hand might have been the difference in winning or losing.

That was the difference. I don't think the Kings themselves even thought they could win until that weird turn Game 2 took. They were getting steamrolled until that point.

I agree with Shredder that a lot of those posts were in the moment and shouldn't be taken that seriously. On the ride home from Game 6 my daughter cried most of the way and I wanted fight somebody (Why? How can sports make you feel such strong emotions when you are not even really involved in the game? I don't get it, but it's real.). I felt like they blew Games 5 and 6 and had no desire to put us through the meat grinder again. And last night would have been a grind. Trailed the whole way, stupid fluke goals, more penalties against the Kings. Although with an ultimately satisfying ending.
   821. Langer Monk Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:10 PM (#4717773)
TSN.ca's suggesting that Pierre McGuire has interviewed for the Pens GM job.
   822. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: June 03, 2014 at 02:33 AM (#4717876)
Is handzuzs aigned for next year? I would hope the hawks trade versteeg and manage to get rid of bolig and let pirri morin amd teavo get some time in amd see what they can do.
   823. JL Posted: June 03, 2014 at 09:44 AM (#4717908)
TSN.ca's suggesting that Pierre McGuire has interviewed for the Pens GM job.


I am hoping he takes the job if only to improve the NBC coverage.
   824. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 03, 2014 at 10:12 AM (#4717923)
Is handzuzs aigned for next year? I would hope the hawks trade versteeg and manage to get rid of bolig and let pirri morin amd teavo get some time in amd see what they can do.

No, Handzus is a FA. He might retire, and I hope he does, so that the Hawks don't re-sign him. Hawks have already traded Pirri to Florida. Morin is a RFA, so the Hawks might just deal his rights to someone else if they're not gonna play him. Bollig's new 3 year extension kicks in next season, so while it's possible they have a change of heart, he's pretty likely to be back, IMO. Versteeg has been traded so many times since 2010, but maybe the fact that he's only owed around $2mil for the next 2 years someone might take a chance on him for a draft pick.

Most of those were context driven, so to remove the posts around them completely removes the context.

I added the appropriate amount of context in my post for the point I was trying to make. I didn't edit anything out of your comments.
   825. Yardape Posted: June 03, 2014 at 11:24 AM (#4717973)
I agree with Shredder that a lot of those posts were in the moment and shouldn't be taken that seriously.


Serious or not, I think those posts grate because fans from other teams haven't done that in this thread. It seems like it's just the Kings fans.
   826. Shredder Posted: June 03, 2014 at 12:15 PM (#4718026)
I added the appropriate amount of context in my post for the point I was trying to make. I didn't edit anything out of your comments.
Right. Playing one side of a conversation is always a completely accurate recitation of events. Sorry, but I'm not going to take any lessons on fandom from the most front running fan base in sports.
   827. Shredder Posted: June 03, 2014 at 12:54 PM (#4718056)
And this bandwagon ######## should die, considering the fact that the NHL would have preferred the Hawks in the finals over the Kings.
This actually makes no sense. How does this refute the fact that Hawks fans are front-runners? The NHL would love the ratings because a bunch of people who didn't give a #### about the Hawks six years ago are apparently infatuated with them now. I'm sure league doesn't care that six years ago, no one could name more than maybe two active players on the roster. The first season after Wirtz's death? Hawks still didn't finish in the top half in attendance. Though I apologize if present company were among the 2,000 people who used to actually show up Hawks games in the mid-aughts.
Serious or not, I think those posts grate because fans from other teams haven't done that in this thread. It seems like it's just the Kings fans.
More than happy to stay away if my presence grates on you.
   828. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 03, 2014 at 01:12 PM (#4718071)
The Penguins don't have any idea what the hell they're doing. I keep hoping it's not ownership that's the problem, but...
   829. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 03, 2014 at 01:44 PM (#4718113)
Right. Playing one side of a conversation is always a completely accurate recitation of events. Sorry, but I'm not going to take any lessons on fandom from the most front running fan base in sports.

I said I was trying to limit my snark to one post. And no, most of them weren't conversations. Just you, unprovoked giving up on your team. Again and again and again. Obviously you didn't actually give up on them, but the point I was trying to make, snarkily, is summed up in the end of my post when I called you a "whiny ass, fickle fan," again snarkily. Sorry I had to spell it out, and that you can't take a little ribbing. And I'm only giving you #### cause it's funny that it repeated itself over and over. I look forward to you talking about next season after the Kings lose their only game in the finals.

This actually makes no sense. How does this refute the fact that Hawks fans are front-runners? The NHL would love the ratings because a bunch of people who didn't give a #### about the Hawks six years ago are apparently infatuated with them now. I'm sure league doesn't care that six years ago, no one could name more than maybe two active players on the roster. The first season after Wirtz's death? Hawks still didn't finish in the top half in attendance. Though I apologize if present company were among the 2,000 people who used to actually show up Hawks games in the mid-aughts.

Seven seasons ago, in the 2007-2008 season, in which the Blackhawks didn't make the playoffs for the 5th straight year, and had only made the playoffs once in the past 10 years, and hadn't won a series in twelve years, the Blackhawks outdrew the Kings. Wirtz died early that season, and it was a significant jump in attendance from the previous season. The next year, the first full season after Wirtz's death, the Hawks led the league in attendance - they went to the WCF that year, but usually the "bandwagoning" occurs after some success. Continue to ignore how terrible of an owner Wirtz was, how he actively drove fans away and conducted business in such a way that it seemed like his main goal was to antogonize fans. I know plenty of people, myself included, who actively avoided going to games with the sole intention of spiting Wirtz. The man was ####### booed during his memorial in the game after he died, with his family on the ice. It's not a coincidence the team was talking about getting home games on TV before he was even buried. The fact that fans embraced the team again, and so quickly, is amazing (and obviously getting good helped, even if the order of events is always skewed to make it look "worse").

Yes, there's bandwagoners. Any team, well any team but the Kings, sees an increase in fandom after success. I fail to see how that's a bad thing, or why in hockey it's considered such an insult. The fact that so many people have embraced the Hawks is a good thing, not bad. Don't take out the fact that the Kings fan base blows out on good fans (seriously, the ratings for game 7 in Buffalo were almost double that of LA). Hockey needs more fans, not less.
   830. Shredder Posted: June 03, 2014 at 02:51 PM (#4718217)
Yes, there's bandwagoners. Any team, well any team but the Kings, sees an increase in fandom after success.
This is untrue. Kings attendance in comparison to capacity, staring in 2008-2009:

2009: 89.1%
2010: 93.6%
2011: 99.8%
2012: 100.0%
2013: 100.3%
2014: 107.6%

The point was the that Kings were still routinely outdrawing the Hawks, in a much smaller building, even when they were terrible and had no real hope of being good, despite not being a traditional hockey market or having real historical success to speak of. That Hawks fans were butthurt over Wirtz is not exactly an argument in their favor. I understand he was a terrible owner. I use to hate Georgia Frontiere. Didn't keep me from rooting for the Rams before they skipped town. I give Rocky a lot of credit for the way he nurtured the fan base.
(seriously, the ratings for game 7 in Buffalo were almost double that of LA
This is just a dumb argument, and I know you're not dumb. You understand what those numbers mean, correct? I'm not sure how pointing out that ~300,000 more people in Los Angeles were watching a hockey game at 5:00 pm on a Sunday than were watching at 8:00 pm in Buffalo is an indictment of LA fans.

The Kings fan base is narrow, but deep. I've never met a casual Kings fan, though I'm sure they exist. I haven't lived in LA for a while. They are not like Dodgers or Lakers fans. Outside of the Bears, Chicago doesn't have a particular good reputation when it comes to die-hard fans. Though I know many individual die hard Cubs and Sox fans (not many Bulls), Wrigley is not exactly filled on a daily basis with people paying a whole lot of attention to the Cubs. I know hardly anyone who I could point to as a die-hard Hawks fan (though they may call themselves that). Their fan base is wide and, for now, appears fairly shallow. We'll see what happens when, like all teams, they return to the downward curve of the success cycle. If they're still filling the building at that point, I'll gladly eat crow.
I fail to see how that's a bad thing, or why in hockey it's considered such an insult.
I have no problem with people who say "ya know, I never really paid a lot of attention to this sport until the city got caught up in it, and now I really enjoy it". That's natural, and how teams build fan bases. What I have a problem with are the people I'm surrounded by who tell me they're lifelong Hawks fans, despite seeing roughly 3,000 people at Hawks games 10 years ago. As someone who stayed loyal to the Angels and Kings (outside of the occasional emotional outburst on an baseball message board) through a lot of really wretched years, I find it insulting.
   831. The Kentucky Gentleman, Mark Edward Posted: June 03, 2014 at 04:18 PM (#4718299)
I don't think the Hawks need a complete overhaul this off-season, and they don't need to bring in a superstar. I definitely want to see them get younger. I'd love to see Teravainen play with Kane & Saad next season, despite the fact that it might be a mess defensively. Shaw/Smith/Bickell seems like a fine third line. I'm a bit disappointed by Kruger's lack of development this year, so he'll be back on the 4th line with Bollig and Morin/Nordstrom/Versteeg.

Ideally I'd like to see the Hawks acquire Spezza; he's a bit expensive but he's a UFA after 2015 (I'd really like to see Kesler here but he's signed through 2016 and that concerns me, considering Kane & Toews' contract situations). I'm not sure if the Hawks have the prospects to pull it off. They've got some solid guys in the system but no real blue chippers outside of Teuvo.

I'm not sure much can be done with defense or much should be done with the defense. I don't really want to see Rozsival back but he's making a bit too much to be dumped onto another team. I'd like to see Clendening in the NHL but not sure if there's room. And there's the whole David Rundblad thing.

If the Hawks do nothing this off-season they're still a very strong team but I am worried about Hossa, Sharp, Seabrook, & Oduya entering decline phases. I think this off-season will be less about improving the team for next season and more about preparing for the craziness of next off-season, when Kane and Toews become UFA's.
   832. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 03, 2014 at 05:40 PM (#4718355)
I don't think the Hawks need a complete overhaul this off-season, and they don't need to bring in a superstar. I definitely want to see them get younger. I'd love to see Teravainen play with Kane & Saad next season, despite the fact that it might be a mess defensively. Shaw/Smith/Bickell seems like a fine third line. I'm a bit disappointed by Kruger's lack of development this year, so he'll be back on the 4th line with Bollig and Morin/Nordstrom/Versteeg.

Ideally I'd like to see the Hawks acquire Spezza; he's a bit expensive but he's a UFA after 2015 (I'd really like to see Kesler here but he's signed through 2016 and that concerns me, considering Kane & Toews' contract situations). I'm not sure if the Hawks have the prospects to pull it off.


Trading for veterans is not congruous to getting younger. Which do you really want to see the Blackhawks do?
   833. Langer Monk Posted: June 03, 2014 at 05:46 PM (#4718356)
In other news, in an effort to really give me a coronary during a game, the Devils have given Zidlicky another 1 year contract.
   834. Shredder Posted: June 03, 2014 at 05:50 PM (#4718357)
If the Hawks do nothing this off-season they're still a very strong team but I am worried about Hossa, Sharp, Seabrook, & Oduya entering decline phases. I think this off-season will be less about improving the team for next season and more about preparing for the craziness of next off-season, when Kane and Toews become UFA's.
Any time you have three of the best players in the league, and arguably the three best in their current roles, you're going to be a tough team to play. As regards Sharp and Hossa, have the post-playoff injuries rumors started yet? Hossa didn't seem hurt to me, but maybe just snake bit.
   835. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: June 03, 2014 at 05:55 PM (#4718359)
Iforgot that Pirri had been traded. And I would be shocked if the hawks let kane and towes make it to be UFA's
   836. The Kentucky Gentleman, Mark Edward Posted: June 03, 2014 at 06:22 PM (#4718374)
Trading for veterans is not congruous to getting younger. Which do you really want to see the Blackhawks do?


Acquiring Spezza would mean trading one of the manageable veteran contracts- Sharp, Seabrook, Oduya, Rozsival, Versteeg.

I'd take Spezza on the Hawks but I'd prefer Teravainen to get top-6 minutes in the NHL.
   837. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 03, 2014 at 06:29 PM (#4718377)
I'm not trying to turn it into an argument, or even really a discussion, but you do realize there's a bit of a disconnect between the 2nd third of your post and the first, right? Dammit, it was supposed to be harmless ribbing.

The point was the that Kings were still routinely outdrawing the Hawks, in a much smaller building, even when they were terrible and had no real hope of being good, despite not being a traditional hockey market or having real historical success to speak of.

Any other qualifiers you want to add?

That Hawks fans were butthurt over Wirtz is not exactly an argument in their favor. I understand he was a terrible owner. I use to hate Georgia Frontiere.

If you were dumb enough to keep giving her money when she was trying to move the team, that's your choice. Paying an ####### just to prove you're a real fan seems a little pointless to me.

Though I know many individual die hard Cubs and Sox fans (not many Bulls), Wrigley is not exactly filled on a daily basis with people paying a whole lot of attention to the Cubs. I know hardly anyone who I could point to as a die-hard Hawks fan (though they may call themselves that).

Perhaps you need to meet more people. Or move out of Wrigleyville; it's a young crowd, not sure that many people there are going to fit into your acceptable fandom definition. And you know me, I'm a bigger Bulls fan than Hawks, Cubs or Bears. Though, if Reinsdorf doesn't prove he really wants to make the Bulls a winner and keep pocketing record profits, he's not going to see any more of my money (as if he'll notice).

What I have a problem with are the people I'm surrounded by who tell me they're lifelong Hawks fans, despite seeing roughly 3,000 people at Hawks games 10 years ago. As someone who stayed loyal to the Angels and Kings (outside of the occasional emotional outburst on an baseball message board) through a lot of really wretched years, I find it insulting.

Insulting?
   838. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 03, 2014 at 06:41 PM (#4718387)
Going from Handzus to Teuvo as the 2C, the Hawks get 16 years younger. If they move from Oduya (32, IIRC, and I think he's the most likely to be traded) to Clendening or Johns or Rundblad, that's another spot they're getting younger by a decade (or Rozival or Brookbank). The Hawks can both get younger, and still fill out the roster with experienced types. Adding one slightly bigger name doesn't preclude them from also getting younger.

I'd take Spezza on the Hawks but I'd prefer Teravainen to get top-6 minutes in the NHL.

There's enough minutes, and actual holes on the roster, for both. Whether Teuvo gets Kane or not, what he should get is a steady job and most of the season up here to prove himself.
   839. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 03, 2014 at 06:43 PM (#4718389)
Any time you have three of the best players in the league, and arguably the three best in their current roles, you're going to be a tough team to play. As regards Sharp and Hossa, have the post-playoff injuries rumors started yet? Hossa didn't seem hurt to me, but maybe just snake bit.

True. But if they want to win it all again, they have to address some of the holes/reasons that caused them to lose (and not just lose to the Kings, but look vulnerable against the Wild and at times, the Blues). I haven't seen anything about Hossa, and agree it was just some bad luck. Sharp looked hurt to me, but he looked better the last few games (and he looked great against StL, even when he wasn't scoring).
   840. The Kentucky Gentleman, Mark Edward Posted: June 03, 2014 at 08:00 PM (#4718415)
There's enough minutes, and actual holes on the roster, for both. Whether Teuvo gets Kane or not, what he should get is a steady job and most of the season up here to prove himself.


True. It just seems like they're grooming Teuvo to be an NHL center and it'll be difficult for him to get top-6 minutes if Toews and Spezza/Kesler are also on your roster.

I wouldn't mind a top-6 of Toews/Hossa/Teuvo/Spezza/Kane/Saad. Sharp of course is the odd-man out but he'll have to go at some point if the Hawks want to keep both Toews and Kane, right?
   841. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: June 03, 2014 at 08:15 PM (#4718421)
Isnt the cap supposed to jump to 70 mil? that right there should ensure the hawks can keep kane and towes.
   842. Shredder Posted: June 03, 2014 at 08:55 PM (#4718439)
Well, I never really lived in Wrigleyville, but to the extent I was close, I'm not anymore.
   843. zack Posted: June 03, 2014 at 10:59 PM (#4718500)
The continuing bandwagon talk is hilarious to me, as if it's an insult, for one. More importantly, those bandwagoners have been bandwagoning for six years now, at what point do they become "real fans"?

I'm a bandwagon Chicago Blackhawks fan. The combination of a dynamic young center, all-world defensive RW and Norris trophy defenseman drew me in. Even if they did get swept in the finals. Stupid Penguins.
   844. Shredder Posted: June 03, 2014 at 11:31 PM (#4718504)
I think there's a difference between bandwagonner and front-runner. Every team is going to have bandwagon fans when they do well. Most of them, like Zack, will admit to it, and I don't necessarily have a problem with it. If you don't grow up with a team or a sport, you have to have some entry point. I have a problem with front-runners, fans who show up when a team does well, and bolt when they don't. Front runners don't clear their schedules to watch 65-80 games per year when their team isn't any good, but they go buy shiny new jerseys when the team is on top, and claim they've been lifelong fans when they couldn't name more than three people on the roster five years ago. The test for the new Hawks (and Kings) fans will be how much they care when the team isn't quite so good anymore.

As for Wirtz not televising home games, a lot of us grew up in era when home games for most teams (at least in LA) were almost never televised. Wirtz was anachronistic, but it's not like keeping home games off tv was something he thought up. If you cared about a team, you listened or went to games. I'm not saying he was a good guy, or even a good owner, but a lot of us lived through eras with no to few televised home games. We still supported our teams.
   845. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: June 04, 2014 at 12:59 AM (#4718526)
If i recall correctly i think there was a strech with them not on radio or even tv. Wirtz was one of the worst owners in the history of sports.
   846. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 04, 2014 at 08:36 AM (#4718560)
I'm a bandwagon Chicago Blackhawks fan. The combination of a dynamic young center, all-world defensive RW and Norris trophy defenseman drew me in. Even if they did get swept in the finals. Stupid Penguins.


Well, that overaged almost-rookie backup goaltender of theirs didn't do them any favors. Good job by them getting rid of him and looking for an upgrade.
   847. JL Posted: June 04, 2014 at 09:54 AM (#4718613)
As for Wirtz not televising home games, a lot of us grew up in era when home games for most teams (at least in LA) were almost never televised. Wirtz was anachronistic, but it's not like keeping home games off tv was something he thought up. If you cared about a team, you listened or went to games. I'm not saying he was a good guy, or even a good owner, but a lot of us lived through eras with no to few televised home games. We still supported our teams.


I still think it has an effect. My BIL followed the Hawks as best he could growing up (he is in his early 50s now). going to a game or two a year and following in the paper and on radio. But as he saw other teams televising games, while the Hawks did not, it became harder to support the team. He certainly had difficulty getting his son interested when basketball, football and baseball were all televised.

He is happy that he can watch the games now, but admits his passion is much lower. And if his son is with them, they are watching basketball because his son has no interest in the Hawks.
   848. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 04, 2014 at 11:12 AM (#4718690)
As for Wirtz not televising home games, a lot of us grew up in era when home games for most teams (at least in LA) were almost never televised. Wirtz was anachronistic, but it's not like keeping home games off tv was something he thought up. If you cared about a team, you listened or went to games. I'm not saying he was a good guy, or even a good owner, but a lot of us lived through eras with no to few televised home games. We still supported our teams.

The Hawks did just fine through the 70s, 80s, and 90s; things really got bleak during the 2000s (and was trending that way during the latter part of the decade). FWIW, the only teams not televising their games locally that late were the Expos and Hawks.

Of course, at the end of the day, I can't fathom why other teams' "lesser" fans would bother you, or impact you at all, even if you're surrounded by it every day.

I bandwagoned the Hawks around the same time as zack, as an 11 year old. You'd have to accuse me of bandwagonning on the Bulls, too, considering they got MJ when I was 4 and I was a big fan of his. Probably also for the Bears, too, since they won the Super Bowl when I was 5. At least I can claim pure Cub fandom, since they've pretty much always sucked during my lifetime.
   849. Shredder Posted: June 04, 2014 at 11:33 AM (#4718712)
I bandwagoned the Hawks around the same time as zack, as an 11 year old. You'd have to accuse me of bandwagonning on the Bulls, too, considering they got MJ when I was 4 and I was a big fan of his. Probably also for the Bears, too, since they won the Super Bowl when I was 5. At least I can claim pure Cub fandom, since they've pretty much always sucked during my lifetime.
I certainly wouldn't consider anyone who started following a team when they were a kid a "bandwaggoner", not that it matters. If anything, early success reduced my interest in the Lakers. They were just always good when I was growing up, so when they weren't good anymore, I didn't really care. Even now I don't really care too much about the Lakers unless they're in the playoffs. I've always had a bit of a contrarian streak though, which is probably part of the reason I was an Angels fan in Dodger country, and a Kings fan in an area where no one cared about hockey. The main reason for each was because of my dad, but that bit of my personality probably helped it along.
   850. Eddo Posted: June 04, 2014 at 11:56 AM (#4718739)
At least I can claim pure Cub fandom, since they've pretty much always sucked during my lifetime.

Now there's a slogan: "The Chicago Cubs: our fans are 100% Shredder-approved, since we've always sucked!"

-----

I asked a variant of this question after the 2010 Cup win, and got pretty much a uniform response (which I agreed with): the "true" Hawks fans that complained about bandwagoners were far more annoying than the actual bandwagon fans themselves.

-----

And really, I could care less what team someone roots for or why (bandwagon, die hard, whatever). The only rule I have is that when you pick a team, you have to stick with it(*).

(*) Some exceptions apply, such as the team leaving your hometown (in which case, you'd get to pick a new team) or you stopping being a fan due to bad ownership (in which case, I'm less OK with you picking a new team).
   851. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 04, 2014 at 12:26 PM (#4718771)
you stopping being a fan due to bad ownership (in which case, I'm less OK with you picking a new team).

I'm ok with the stopping being a fan, but I couldn't pick a new team. When the Hawks were in the pits of Witrzdom, I never rooted for another team; I rooted against teams (always against the Wings) and may have had teams I pulled for during a specific series or playoffs but never would have considered myself a fan of that team (I also have no second favorite team in any sports, though I don't mind the White Sox being successful unless it were to directly conflicts with the Cubs; and it never has, Crosstown Cup not included).
   852. Eddo Posted: June 04, 2014 at 12:39 PM (#4718784)
Moses - yeah, that's the kind of situation I was thinking of: you just stop being a fan of any single team, period.

I have teams I like and don't like (besides my primary rooting interests of the White Sox, Bears, Blackhawks, and Bulls), and within two minutes of turning on any sporting event, I will develop a rooting interest.
   853. Shredder Posted: June 04, 2014 at 01:07 PM (#4718811)
Now there's a slogan: "The Chicago Cubs: our fans are 100% Shredder-approved, since we've always sucked!"
Acutally, I've always believed that the few true Cubs fans are lost in a sea of frat bros and trixies. When I moved to Chicago, I had a lot more respect for Sox fans, because just about any ####### would claim to be a Cubs fan. No one admitted to being a Sox fan unless they were truly Sox fans. Having grown up with the Dodgers and Angels, the dynamic played out much the same way. Of course, I know plenty of people who follow the Cubs pretty closely, and they shouldn't be lumped in with the rest, but to the outside observer, Cubs fans in general appear much more to be fans of North-side/Wrigley than fans of the actual baseball team.
(*) Some exceptions apply, such as the team leaving your hometown (in which case, you'd get to pick a new team) or you stopping being a fan due to bad ownership (in which case, I'm less OK with you picking a new team).
I have a few friends here who have become big Hawks fans, despite having lived most of their lives rooting for other teams. One is from Saskatchewan and was a Flames fan growing up. I guess it's acceptable since he didn't grow up in Calgary, and now lives in Chicago. My dad kind of did the same thing (grew up in Montana as a Red Sox fan, but adopted the Angels when he moved to an area with actual teams). Another is from LA, long time Kings fan, but has been a Hawks season ticket holder for a while (Wolves season ticket holder before that). I've seen him turn from a Kings fan who also kinda liked the Hawks into a Hawks fan who still kinda likes the Kings. I don't mind in his case, because he's spent a ton of money on the Hawks over the years. I just couldn't see myself ever changing allegiances, but that's just me.
   854. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 04, 2014 at 05:34 PM (#4719144)
Just for the record, this 5:00 local start time on a work day is some bullllshit. I'm leaving work now (2:30). 6:00 would have been far more reasonable, screw those east coast pussies.
   855. Langer Monk Posted: June 04, 2014 at 11:12 PM (#4719383)
Thank you, Kings, Part 1.
   856. simon bedford Posted: June 05, 2014 at 03:34 AM (#4719445)
growing up in toronto with the ballard ownership i can understand how anyone can switch alligances. after several years of watching good players walk over minor contract issues, or be traded for nothing, or dealt when they still had plenty of upside there was no reason to remain loyal whatsoever, when it was clear even to me , a child at the time, that ownership had zero commitment to winning.
i became a whalers fan for years and when they up and moved to carolina i gave up on them as well and currently have no nhl team, i watch the leafs on occasion but feel no emotional attatchment to this team in the least and why should i? because a group of players from all over the country slip on a uniform with the name toronto on the front?
   857. TerpNats Posted: June 05, 2014 at 09:13 AM (#4719489)
And Gary Bettman probably had to run downstairs for a fresh pair of pants as soon as the New York-LA Finals was clinched. So there's that, too.
While I'm rooting for the Kings (hey, I'm moving to Los Angeles soon, and I've followed that team ever since seeing a game against Nashville at the Staples Center in March 2000), there's no way you can convince me that Bettman and the hockey "establishment" wouldn't have preferred seeing two Original Six teams go at it for the Cup, just like last year. Many in hockey still don't take any franchise born in 1967 or later seriously, even though we're not far from the 50th anniversary of the NHL doubling in size.

Regardless of what happens in the finals, this has been a watershed season for hockey in SoCal. The outdoor game at Dodger Stadium was a huge success (there should be a sequel at Angel Stadium next winter), the Kings and Ducks finally met in the playoffs and had a thrilling series, Anaheim had a superlative regular season (although Bruce Boudreau remains snakebit in spring) and LA is three wins away from its second Cup in three years. For a market where hockey was close to invisible nearly 30 years ago, the rise in interest has been incredible. Thank you, Wayne Gretzky, for being the catalyst.
   858. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 06, 2014 at 10:56 AM (#4720323)
Good move by the Penguins. Anytime you have an unexpected opportunity to hire the architect of a team that made the playoffs 3 times in 11 years, you have to do it.
   859. Shredder Posted: June 06, 2014 at 12:53 PM (#4720416)
While I'm rooting for the Kings (hey, I'm moving to Los Angeles soon, and I've followed that team ever since seeing a game against Nashville at the Staples Center in March 2000), there's no way you can convince me that Bettman and the hockey "establishment" wouldn't have preferred seeing two Original Six teams go at it for the Cup, just like last year.
Yeah, there's no way anyone can look at those game seven ratings and think the NHL wouldn't rather have Chicago in the final. I still think the ratings in LA were pretty good for a hockey game, but they were off the charts in Chicago.
there should be a sequel at Angel Stadium next winter
It's gonna be in San Francisco next year.
Thank you, Wayne Gretzky, for being the catalyst.
Wayne gets a lot of credit for agreeing to come to LA and really embracing it, but for all the crap he pulled, Bruce McNall is the guy you really should be thanking.
   860. zack Posted: June 06, 2014 at 01:23 PM (#4720444)
Isn't that a demotion for Rutherford? Or was his new title in Carolina just vestigial?

I'm not sure I'd want that job if I were a GM. The cupboards bare and the cap is a mess but you still need to win will Crosby is in his prime or you are a failure.

Bylsma is gone.
   861. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 06, 2014 at 03:16 PM (#4720527)
Unemployed to employed isn't a demotion.

The Penguins' owners are fairly young, so Penguins fans have 30 years of irrelevance to look forward to. Not everyone can win.
   862. steagles Posted: June 06, 2014 at 03:30 PM (#4720540)
The Penguins' owners are fairly young, so Penguins fans have 30 years of irrelevance to look forward to. Not everyone can win.
would you like some cheese with that whine?
   863. steagles Posted: June 06, 2014 at 03:33 PM (#4720545)
(that last post might sound a little cattier than intended, but seriously, can you at least wait to go full goth until after crosby's next concussion?)
   864. steagles Posted: June 06, 2014 at 03:35 PM (#4720546)
(that last one might also sound kind of catty, so i should just stop now.)
   865. zack Posted: June 06, 2014 at 05:00 PM (#4720606)
Unemployed to employed isn't a demotion.


He moved to team president when he stopped being the Canes GM, no?
   866. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 06, 2014 at 05:57 PM (#4720658)
You're right and I was wrong, actually--I thought they'd fired him after that, but they had not. Just kicked him upstairs.
   867. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 06, 2014 at 06:06 PM (#4720666)
I also thought I saw he has equity in the Canes. Guess he'd have to get rid of that to take this job. Is he also getting a stake in the team?
   868. Langer Monk Posted: June 07, 2014 at 10:53 PM (#4721165)
I think I saw a splash when Lundqvist hit the ice there.
   869. Shredder Posted: June 07, 2014 at 10:53 PM (#4721166)
I take back everything I said about the Hawks diving. In overtime, the Rangers have taken it to another level.
   870. Shredder Posted: June 07, 2014 at 10:59 PM (#4721167)
The most surprising thing about Kreider's breakaway was that he didn't "accidentally" take out Quick the way he "accidentally" took out Carey Price.
   871. Langer Monk Posted: June 07, 2014 at 11:01 PM (#4721169)
On the other hand, he very nearly took himself out.
   872. Langer Monk Posted: June 07, 2014 at 11:40 PM (#4721176)
Thank you Kings, Part 2.
   873. Random Transaction Generator Posted: June 08, 2014 at 12:07 AM (#4721184)
I guess it's possible to get swept and still claim you almost won the series, if you lose every game in OT.
   874. Snowboy Posted: June 08, 2014 at 01:14 AM (#4721200)
Wow the Kings are the comeback kids this year. The Rangers again dominated most of this game, but had it slip away, and then lost in OT. Vigneault was publicly pretty negative after game one loss about "not bringing A game" but I think he needs to switch 180 degrees on the flight home tomorrow. Rangers are very much still in this, and I expect the Stanley Cup to be presented in LA next weekend. LA has won two, but they are not even really getting a chance to play their hit 'em style.

re: "Bettman and the hockey establishment" I think those terms are mutually exclusive. The "hockey establishment" decides who plays for the US Junior team, or Team Finland, or the Manitoba provincial team. Bettman and his boys would walk past Ron Ellis in a hotel hallway with nary a glance if he was wearing a plain golf shirt. All they care about is money, and they have relentlessly and consistently committed themselves to chasing it in "new" markets. They don't care about fans in Saskatchewan, or Quebec, or Hamilton; they want to chase the unknowns in Atlanta, Phoenix, and Florida. They don't care about the history of an "Original Six" matchup: they care about the future, not the past. The past is for suckers (and fans) who want to remember Smythe, and Norris, and Adams -those guys are dead, so let's rename the divisions. Bettman is quite happy that Montreal and Boston were eliminated in the East, and Chicago in the West. For this year, it would have meant huge ratings and local sales, and a Chicago-Rangers Final would have been really fun to watch. But Bettman is all about a long series and a kid in Compton, and #### the kids in Joliet.
   875. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 08, 2014 at 03:00 AM (#4721218)
Nobody in Compton can afford to play Hockey. It's more like a kid in Newport Beach.

Anyway, long night at the ole' ice rink tonight. After Quick pulled one of his 'wander out of the net, oops it's a goal' plays, I thought we were toast but this team just will not be denied. Oh, and if the Nash and Lundqvist plays don't draw an embellishment call, there is no reason to have the call on the books. Just a shameful display.

And Matt Greene, thanks for everything, we'll see you again next fall.
   876. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 08, 2014 at 08:37 AM (#4721223)
Lundvqist ought to be suspended for that dive. That was a horseshit ##### move by rec league standards.

When it's THAT perfectly clear on replay what happened, I see no reason why at the very least New York should not start game 3 with a man in the box for two minutes.
   877. Howie Menckel Posted: June 08, 2014 at 09:22 AM (#4721229)
Well, ex-referee Kerry Fraser and the NBC announcers thought it was a clear penalty on LAK. I think you can only get an embellishment on a non-penalty, no?

And, lol, I picture Rangers fans heads exploding over lack of mention of possible interference on the LAK 3rd goal, which the NBC announcers also thought was a non-called penalty that would have disallowed the goal. Again, Fraser agreed with the NBC announcers.
   878. SteveF Posted: June 08, 2014 at 09:26 AM (#4721230)
I think you can only get an embellishment on a non-penalty, no?

Actually, pretty much the only time they do call an embellishment penalty is on a penalty. Officials are too afraid to call a straight up embellishment penalty out of fear of being wrong. The difference between going on a power play and going on a PK is like 1/3 of a goal, which is quite an impact in a league where games are typically decided by 1 goal.
   879. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 08, 2014 at 09:29 AM (#4721231)
It may be that by rule you can only get embellishment on a non-penalty, but that is an extremely stupid rule if so.

If by rule Carter's contact with Lundqvist is a penalty, that also is a stupid rule. There is no reason why a goaltender should be allowed to stand behind the net and say "neener neener, can't go this way because you're not allowed to touch me" to an opposing forward going after the puck.

As for the third period goal, yes, obvious interference is obvious. Is this like the NFL where the replay officials aren't allowed to overrule the on-ice officials and call a penalty? I imagine it must be. At any rate I know they certainly could have disallowed the goal and did not.

That neither justifies nor excuses Lundqvist's audition for the Swedish soccer team, however.
   880. Howie Menckel Posted: June 08, 2014 at 09:29 AM (#4721232)
I see. I don't think they mentioned embellishment possibilities, though obviously there was in a non-technical sense. Same for that Kings guy who got hit in the face with a stick, although that was an even more obvious penalty that he exaggerated (JFK head-snap-back) understandably to ensure the call was made (as it should have been). So no way that would be subject to embellishment penalty.

this is interesting:

"64.1 Diving / Embellishment – Any player who blatantly dives, embellishes a fall or a reaction, or who feigns an injury shall be penalized with a minor penalty under this rule.

A goalkeeper who deliberately initiates contact with an attacking player other than to establish position in the crease, or who otherwise acts to create the appearance of other than incidental contact with an attacking player, is subject to the assessment of a minor penalty for diving / embellishment."

............

since 4 experts all agreed it was "more than incidental contact," it's not clear to me from the rule that embellishment could be in play for a goaltender in a case like this (though I understand that some don't like special rules for Gs and QBs).
   881. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 08, 2014 at 09:32 AM (#4721233)
All hockey players are trained to theatrically snap their heads back anytime an opposing stick gets near their faces. I'm actually impressed at how often refs get it right on whether there actually was contact or not.
   882. zack Posted: June 08, 2014 at 10:33 AM (#4721241)
To me it was clearly a penalty on Carter AND Lundqvist clearly dove afterwards. Probably should have been dueling minors.
   883. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 08, 2014 at 10:44 AM (#4721243)
I wonder if there should really be a penalty for diving, or if it might not be better for the ref to say "hey, you look hurt, you'd better go back to the trainer's room and get checked out. Just to be safe. If you're okay then come back for the next period." Safety first, after all.
   884. Shredder Posted: June 08, 2014 at 11:21 AM (#4721259)
Regarding diving/embellishment: A ref can call unsportsmanlike on a clear dive when there was no other penalty, or he can call a penalty for an illegal play (high stick, interference, etc) AND call embellishment. Under the rules*, Carter should have been given penalty, but Lundqvist should have gotten two for embellishment. On the Nash penalty, there should have only been one call, and that should have been on Nash for diving.

On the goal, it's probably not even worth me writing about it, but I'll just say I agree with Keith Jones and Jeremy Roenick. Here's the rule:
“If an attacking player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by a defending player so as to cause him to come into contact with the goalkeeper, such contact will not be deemed contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.”
King's path was taking straight north toward the blue line, then curving toward the front (but not when McDonagh pushes him into Lundqvist. Certainly not a penalty, but the goal is much more debatable. DId he make a reasonable effort to avoid contact? It's not a reviewable play**. I'll leave it at that. Though I'm sure if I were a Rangers fan, I'd be pissed.
All hockey players are trained to theatrically snap their heads back anytime an opposing gets near their faces. I'm actually impressed at how often refs get it right on whether there actually was contact or not.
I think it's just a natural reaction to head shots. You could get hit with a spit wad and it would probably force you to jerk your head back. 99% of the time, it's a legit penalty. 100% of the time if you don't play for Montreal.

*This is a terrible rule, by the way. The crease exists for a reason. If a goaltender chooses to leave the crease to play the puck like a regular skater, he should be treated like a regular skater. You don't want to get hit? Then don't leave the crease.

**This was reviewable in the last series as a timing issue, though I don't think the league ever really clarified what happened. The ref determined that Toews made contact with Quick, but they reviewed to see if the puck went in before or after the contact. Because that bounced off of Voynov, then went in after the contact, they ruled no goal.
   885. Langer Monk Posted: June 08, 2014 at 12:45 PM (#4721293)
I agree with Shredder. The difficult part of calling off a goal like that is that I've seen as many called off as those that are counted. The sticks to the face I think will cause a natural head jerk - but it's the acting that needs to stop. The league needs to crack down on the embellishing like they did with hooking, and allow a quick video review if needed.
   886. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 08, 2014 at 04:13 PM (#4721388)
Watching the replay, they should have waived the goal off. Those are the breaks, calling that live is very tough. It wasn't the tying or winning goal but it obviously didn't help.
   887. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 09, 2014 at 03:47 PM (#4722034)
Revenue up, cap might be over $70mil.

They don't care about the history of an "Original Six" matchup: they care about the future, not the past. The past is for suckers (and fans) who want to remember Smythe, and Norris, and Adams -those guys are dead, so let's rename the divisions. Bettman is quite happy that Montreal and Boston were eliminated in the East, and Chicago in the West. For this year, it would have meant huge ratings and local sales, and a Chicago-Rangers Final would have been really fun to watch. But Bettman is all about a long series and a kid in Compton, and #### the kids in Joliet.

This is a little all over the place, and I guess it matters when the next TV negotiation is up. It's arguable that the Kings in the SCF over the Hawks is better for the long term (and I don't see you really making that argument here in your promo), and clearly inferior in the short term.

I take back everything I said about the Hawks diving. In overtime, the Rangers have taken it to another level.

Oh, how I laughed when I read this. I earned this "I told you so."

Personally, I can't get too worked up on an embellishment on what should be/already is a penalty (so, the Lundqvist one). But I'd be furious on the manufactured penalty, like the Nash one.
   888. Langer Monk Posted: June 09, 2014 at 07:28 PM (#4722180)
According to some reporters, the competition committee was split on whether that should have been a good goal too.

They also have recommended expanding the trapezoid behind the net. #### you, NHL. Dumbest rule ever, put in place to limit 1 player's skills, and now suddenly, as he's got 1 year left, maybe, let's ease the restriction.
   889. Shredder Posted: June 09, 2014 at 08:51 PM (#4722210)
Rangers fans expect a penalty every time one of their guys fall on a stick check.
   890. TerpNats Posted: June 09, 2014 at 09:04 PM (#4722213)
Once the middle period starts, the Kings finally will play more than one second on the ice with a lead in the Stanley Cup finals.
   891. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: June 09, 2014 at 09:47 PM (#4722235)
#### the trapezoid. Let the goalies go wherever they want--but outside the crease they're fair game. (Subject to the usual rules concerning interference, obstruction, and so forth.)
   892. Snowboy Posted: June 09, 2014 at 09:48 PM (#4722237)
I have to disagree with the CBC announcers who said that the Rangers had a good first period tonight. It was end to end with few whistles, but not a lot of good scoring chances. I did not detect the necessary sense of urgency from a team down 2-0. That first period penalty call on Willie Mitchell was as ticky-tack as you'll see a call at any level, but the Rangers didn't even manage a shot on net during that PP. Terrible.

And in this second period, we are seeing Vintage Quick. New York is in deep trouble.
   893. Shredder Posted: June 09, 2014 at 09:53 PM (#4722240)
Nash going full Kreider on that one. Can't get one past him, may as well try to hurt him.
   894. Snowboy Posted: June 09, 2014 at 10:16 PM (#4722245)
Uhh Nash could have ruined Quick on that play! Voynov had his stick into Nash and twisted him onto one foot. But instead of crashing the goalie, he actually leapt over top of Quick and runs into the the net instead.

Now 3-0 Kings with a period to play. I may have been wrong, this series may not go back to the Staples Center. New York's attempts to take advantage of their speed have been individual dashes, and LA is blocking the middle and stifling any stretch passes. And Vigneault keeps throwing out the same lines and D pairings (particularly noticeable on the PP) maybe they just do not have an answer for this Kings team.
   895. Shredder Posted: June 09, 2014 at 10:41 PM (#4722257)
Yeah, you're probably right he could done worse.
   896. TerpNats Posted: June 09, 2014 at 10:46 PM (#4722260)
3-0 in game and series. The Kings make it seem so methodical.
   897. Shredder Posted: June 09, 2014 at 10:50 PM (#4722264)
Funny that for all the Rangers huge acquisitions over the years, Drury, Gomez, Nash, and Richards, the guy that actually played the best as a Ranger is one game away from beating them in the finals. Guess Gaborik's two 40 goal seasons weren't good enough.
   898. zack Posted: June 09, 2014 at 11:08 PM (#4722275)
Rangers fans expect a penalty every time one of their guys fall on a stick check.
   899. Langer Monk Posted: June 09, 2014 at 11:39 PM (#4722289)
Thank you, Kings, Part 3. Finish them.

I also find the Gaborik thing hilarious. At least they have Rick Nash now.
   900. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 10, 2014 at 12:52 AM (#4722318)
Standard issue Kings there. Haven't seen them for a while. Made it look routine. I'm sad to see the season end, I'll miss watching this team play.
Page 9 of 10 pages ‹ First  < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Adam M
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3451 - 11:06am, Oct 24)
Last: Joey B. has reignited his October #Natitude

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(908 - 11:03am, Oct 24)
Last: Juilin Sandar to Conkling Speedwell (Arjun)

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(373 - 10:55am, Oct 24)
Last: AROM

NewsblogThe ‘Little Things’ – The Hardball Times
(1 - 10:40am, Oct 24)
Last: BDC

NewsblogRoyals get four AL Gold Glove finalists, but not Lorenzo Cain | The Kansas City Star
(1 - 10:35am, Oct 24)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogWhat's Buster Posey's best trait as a catcher? Here's what his pitchers had to say - Giants Extra
(10 - 10:33am, Oct 24)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogFor Royals' Game 3 starter, road to World Series has been long and winding | FOX Sports
(2 - 10:32am, Oct 24)
Last: Roger McDowell spit on me!

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(47 - 10:30am, Oct 24)
Last: Nasty Nate

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(2 - 10:26am, Oct 24)
Last: Tom Nawrocki

NewsblogDid Adam Dunn Ruin Baseball? – The Hardball Times
(10 - 10:23am, Oct 24)
Last: Jim Furtado

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-24-2014
(2 - 9:50am, Oct 24)
Last: Batman

NewsblogKey question GMs have to weigh with top World Series free agents | New York Post
(34 - 9:49am, Oct 24)
Last: Roger McDowell spit on me!

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(870 - 9:48am, Oct 24)
Last: zonk

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(10 - 8:58am, Oct 24)
Last: Spahn Insane

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-23-2014
(14 - 7:43am, Oct 24)
Last: Rennie's Tenet

Page rendered in 1.3857 seconds
53 querie(s) executed