| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| spade632 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 03:26:53
Who would have thought that :
A) The Canucks would be down 3-0
and
B) The Pens would be down 3-0, having given up 20 goals. ?
The fourth win, as they say, is always the toughest.
Two questions (though feel free to go beyond these).
1) What do you think the chances are of a sweep (or two) and why?
2) What's gone wrong?
Briefly - (though not exhaustively)
Canucks - hot goalie in Quick, and no offensive support.
Pens - Seem to have forgotten how to play defence and have (with the help of the Flyers - it takes two to tango and all) made it into the "UFC" (as they called it on TSN).
And, for bonus - when's the last time there were two sweeps in the first round (at least for presumed "favourites" - I know the President's Trophy winner has never been swept in the 1st round) |
| 18 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest8875 |
Posted - 04/17/2012 : 17:07:41
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
What it means is, IMO and MO only, i think if LA scores first, the Canucks are toast. I don't care if they scored first and lost before, the odds are much better for the team scoring first to win than they are the team getting down a goal. Simple odds really.
That's not what Philly said.. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 17:11:56
quote:
Originally posted by vandrew87
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
Schneider played well, but the one goal was his fault for a bad rebound on what was not a difficult shot. Also, if J. Hansen could find the net instead of denting the post every game so far, the Canucks may actually have a shot as their game can only improve with an early lead. Seriously, i've never seen one guy continuously hit the iron!!!
Sadly, i think the chances of a sweep are pretty good. Pride is one thing, but a hot goalie is another. I'll predict this. If the Canucks can score 1st, they have a shot in game 4.
What does that have to do with anything?? They scored first in the first two games and still lost. They're basically pulling an Islanders...who couldn't protect a lead with a Swat Team and a 12 gauge.
"If you can play, You Can Play"
What it means is, IMO and MO only, i think if LA scores first, the Canucks are toast. I don't care if they scored first and lost before, the odds are much better for the team scoring first to win than they are the team getting down a goal. Simple odds really. |
| vandrew87 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 15:32:26
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
Schneider played well, but the one goal was his fault for a bad rebound on what was not a difficult shot. Also, if J. Hansen could find the net instead of denting the post every game so far, the Canucks may actually have a shot as their game can only improve with an early lead. Seriously, i've never seen one guy continuously hit the iron!!!
Sadly, i think the chances of a sweep are pretty good. Pride is one thing, but a hot goalie is another. I'll predict this. If the Canucks can score 1st, they have a shot in game 4.
What does that have to do with anything?? They scored first in the first two games and still lost. They're basically pulling an Islanders...who couldn't protect a lead with a Swat Team and a 12 gauge.
"If you can play, You Can Play" |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 14:26:41
I often do similar Beans but it really depends on the pick you get. I was high on the Pens and got an early pick in one of my pools, so i grabbed Crosby. I was not super high on the Blues and figured others would be so i avoided them. However, in the 3rd round, no one was really touching them so i was able to grab 4 of their better ones after my Crosby pick (with a C. Higgins pick in at 2.  ). |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 10:26:12
You just have to make better picks, Lee.
I went deep on Chicago, San Jose, Philly, and Boston.
My strategy for playoff pools is against the grain. If everyone is taking Penguins, I take Flyers. It's a strategy that will see either victory or total defeat. There is no middle ground. However, who cares what spot you finish in if you are not first. 2nd place is the first loser, right??
I am quite please to say in my draft I am the only one who took Flyers and with Giroux, Jagr, and Briere, and most others with Crosby, Letang, Malkin, and Neal, I am looking good.
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!! |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 10:25:15
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4600
No surprise to me about the Nucks Here they Play well all season But suck in the Plauoff's .. Lou is a SIVE.. So they made it to the SC finals last yr Luck... No sedin Sister's no keslar and Oh Yea Sive Louuuu...
LOL....thanks for the laugh. They suck in the playoff, but made it to the final last year by luck. Priceless!  |
| Lee Marshall |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 10:21:30
Really glad I didn't pick ANY Canucks for my playoff pool. I didn't think they had the heart to do it again. [although going out this way/this early is a surprise]
VERY sorry I have 7 Penguins [out pf 12 picks] in the pool. Even though I'm tied for first...right now...that ain't gonna last more than 1 or 2 more games. THAT'S a real shocker.
The Preds better go all the way to the final. Otherwise, with 5 of 'em, I'm done...and will likely finish 2nd last. [another guy has all Hawks and Sens]
I picked the Pens and Preds to meet for the cup. Now? Philly looks good..or.maybe Boston from the east? Parity!!! It has its place. This ain't one of 'em...for me.
Who the cap fits...Let them wear it. |
| Guest4600 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 10:20:11
No surprise to me about the Nucks Here they Play well all season But suck in the Plauoff's .. Lou is a SIVE.. So they made it to the SC finals last yr Luck... No sedin Sister's no keslar and Oh Yea Sive Louuuu...
|
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 09:43:23
Nothing surprises me in the playoffs (anymore)!
Since you (Spade) asked for a brief (not exhaustive) response, I will just state that the NHL has achieved parity at the top, and there are no clear favourites anymore. (If you want the more elongated response, I provided this already in another thread entitled "what went wrong."
|
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 09:36:11
Quick has been extremely hot, though this shouldn't come as a surprise since he's played like this all year. However, even though he get's credit with stealing the game last night, i'm not in agreement that's the case. He contributed for sure, but even though the Canucks outshot LA 41-20, the quality scoring chances were much more even than that. Van seem content with quantity at this point in hopes that they get a lucky bounce, a deflection, or something to get it by Quick. I'm okay with that when there's traffic in front of him, but there were many shots last night from bad angles or from long distance with no one near the net. Just not gonna score on that guy like that.
Schneider played well, but the one goal was his fault for a bad rebound on what was not a difficult shot. Also, if J. Hansen could find the net instead of denting the post every game so far, the Canucks may actually have a shot as their game can only improve with an early lead. Seriously, i've never seen one guy continuously hit the iron!!!
Sadly, i think the chances of a sweep are pretty good. Pride is one thing, but a hot goalie is another. I'll predict this. If the Canucks can score 1st, they have a shot in game 4. If LA scores first, it's likely that the fat lady will start singing!
Haven't caught a ton of the Pitt / Philly series, but from what i saw through two periods yesterday, Fleury was awful! And, i'd agree with the fact that Pitt has gotten off their game. This one's tough to call too. Pitt with their fire power could easily grab the next one if they remember to play some d.
As far as who saw this coming (Pitt and Van down 3-0).....NO ONE! |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 08:45:48
I think both have the potential of ending in 4, but I am shocked by the fact that both series are at 3-0. I think of the 2 teams Pitts has the best chance of extending the series, as at points they seems to click offensively until the game gets chippy and physical. I expect Pitts to win 1 maybe 2 of this series still.
Vancouver just doesnt have the answer for Quick and LA seems to be able to score when needed. Physically LA is beating Vancouver all over the ice. |
| spade632 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 08:43:43
@Slozo and Cyclonis >
I certainly didn't mean to diminish the contributions from the rest of LA's team (especially Dustin Brown) but I've got to leave enough prognostication to around! (Then again, it IS hockey, there's ALWAYS enough to go around... )
More seriously, it's definitely not "just" Quick, but, as Nuxfan says, Quick's numbers are pretty good right now.
IF the Canucks take Game 4, I can see it going six games since they'll be on that extra adrenaline coming home for Game 5.
As for Pens/Flyers - The way both teams have been playing, I don't see the Pens winning Game 4. They've gotten into a run-and-gun, wild west shootout and it's not working for them. But, it isn't over until the fat lady sings (sorry to be cliche) and the Flyers well know that even up 3-0 it's not always safe.
|
| Cyclonis |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 08:29:47
LA is playing a great team game right now and Quick is making ALOT of stops. Van is really missing their top scorer but they don't seem to be playing hard either. They are in a big hole now.
Philly is flying right now and the Pens don't have the physical toughness to slow them down so it becomes a shootout and the Flyers big line of Jagr, Hartnell, and Giroux are on fire.
And to answer the original post...No way i would have bet on this happening. I joked to a friend who is a Vancouver fan before the playoffs started that if Daniel was out and Van got swept in 4 there was a movie deal in LA for Keith. Who knew... |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 08:17:54
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
First, on LA / Vancouver:
Quick only stole the show in the third game - and I have to assume that, as I didn't catch it. The other two games I watched, and I simply saw a team that played a bit better then the other one, all through the line-up.
I don't know, Quick faced 48 shots in game 2, and only let in 2. Those are "game stealing" numbers. Another 41 shots last night, 89 shots over 2 games, and only 2 GA. The Canucks have officially run into a "hot goalie".
quote:
I said it before the series even started (and fortunately for my pools, called for the LA victory): LA is the best 8th seeded team top to bottom that I have ever seen. Frankly. it's just Vancouver's bad luck to draw them, at a time when they are missing Daniel Sedin on top of it all.
So my main point is - it's not just Quick, it's the whole team: their excellent defence; their excellent goalie; their top defensive forwards; and their very deep offensive lineup, despite their struggles offensively during the season.
I think the best 8-seed I ever saw was last year's Blackhawks, but I would agree, LA has played to their potential and more, up and down the lineup, and VAN has not had an answer for it. Quick is but one factor in their success.
quote:
Pitts / Philly
I didn't see this coming, frankly. I mean, I could see Philly winning, but not like this . . . clearly, Philly is the one team that Pittsburgh has a real problem with. No, Fleury has not been great; but even if he had been . . . I think it'd still be 2 games to 1 for Philly. The big issue I see here is Philly's ability to almost completely shut down Maklin, and at the same time, run roughshod offense against the Pens . . . so to me, this is all about the defence of Pittsburgh.
I don't think anyone saw this one either. The shocking thing with PIT is not only they're losing, but how they're losing. 20 GA in 3 games, thats ridiculous.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
[/quote] |
| Guest4744 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 07:02:01
Van - Simply cant find a way to score goals. Missing a top player in the leauge doesnt help. Goaltending has been fine in all 3 games even thow myself and allot of other people thought that would be the problem if there was one at all. This series will still go 6 games IMO. Vancouver is too proud and to good to roll over and die.
Pits - im surprised no one has mentioned the PP as a problem here. That is the #1 reason they are down 3-0. They have given up 2 Short Handed Goals in all 3 games. WTF!! No team will ever win a series with that kind of PP. Honestly im surprised when I see 2-3 short handed goals a series I dont get it. Goaltending hasn't been great but that can be siad for both teams. This series is over in 4. |
| n/a |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 06:12:57
First, on LA / Vancouver:
Quick only stole the show in the third game - and I have to assume that, as I didn't catch it. The other two games I watched, and I simply saw a team that played a bit better then the other one, all through the line-up.
I said it before the series even started (and fortunately for my pools, called for the LA victory): LA is the best 8th seeded team top to bottom that I have ever seen. Frankly. it's just Vancouver's bad luck to draw them, at a time when they are missing Daniel Sedin on top of it all.
So my main point is - it's not just Quick, it's the whole team: their excellent defence; their excellent goalie; their top defensive forwards; and their very deep offensive lineup, despite their struggles offensively during the season.
Pitts / Philly
I didn't see this coming, frankly. I mean, I could see Philly winning, but not like this . . . clearly, Philly is the one team that Pittsburgh has a real problem with. No, Fleury has not been great; but even if he had been . . . I think it'd still be 2 games to 1 for Philly. The big issue I see here is Philly's ability to almost completely shut down Maklin, and at the same time, run roughshod offense against the Pens . . . so to me, this is all about the defence of Pittsburgh.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest6786 |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 05:36:44
Pittsburgh got sucked into a street fight, which is not their style of game. they are way out of their comfort zone and its showing.
haven't been paying much attention to the LA-Van series, but it certainly does look like Henrik misses his brother (sister?). |
| Clatts |
Posted - 04/16/2012 : 05:18:21
Looks to me that both will be out in a sweep, LA and Philly just look really good compared to their opponents
"Most of the guys that wear them are Europeans and French Guys."
Don Cherry on Visors |
|
|
