Stanley Cup Playoffs 2015

I iinda wished I watched. I've disconnected a bit from the series. Not a fan of any of the teams that are left.

I hate the Rangers so maybe I'll watch the next one.

SpezDispensed wrote:Wow, this lightning team is gonna be sooooooooo good for so long.  

Not if they give up 5 goals. Sure, it was an exciting game just like most mistake-filled games are. Getting down 0-2 in front of the home crowd is a recipe for disaster. Scoring 4 to take the lead then blowing it, not so good. Giving up the late tying goal, not good at all. They may have used up all their horseshoes right there. Stamkos also said how they had nothing left.

On the other hand, that's two games in a row they score 6 on The King. I think I read that's only happened to Henrik twice in his career. Both times was this year (was one of those when he came back from the throat injury?) He's not in his prime any more. That monstrous contract will bite them soon.

So, how many touchdowns (without the convert) do you give up before Vigneault remembers that kid Talbot did pretty well.

I really didn't think the Lightning offense would crack the Rangers D and Lundqvist.

wprager wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:Wow, this lightning team is gonna be sooooooooo good for so long.  

Not if they give up 5 goals.  Sure, it was an exciting game just like most mistake-filled games are.  Getting down 0-2 in front of the home crowd is a recipe for disaster.  Scoring 4 to take the lead then blowing it, not so good.  Giving up the late tying goal, not good at all.  They may have used up all their horseshoes right there.  Stamkos also said how they had nothing left.  

On the other hand, that's two games in a row they score 6 on The King.  I think I read that's only happened to Henrik twice in his career.  Both times was this year (was one of those when he came back from the throat injury?)  He's not in his prime any more.  That monstrous contract will bite them soon.

So, how many touchdowns (without the convert) do you give up before Vigneault remembers that kid Talbot did pretty well.

They should have tried to sign Matt O'Connor for insurance.

wprager wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:Wow, this lightning team is gonna be sooooooooo good for so long.  

Not if they give up 5 goals.  Sure, it was an exciting game just like most mistake-filled games are.  Getting down 0-2 in front of the home crowd is a recipe for disaster.  Scoring 4 to take the lead then blowing it, not so good.  Giving up the late tying goal, not good at all.  They may have used up all their horseshoes right there.  Stamkos also said how they had nothing left.  

On the other hand, that's two games in a row they score 6 on The King.  I think I read that's only happened to Henrik twice in his career.  Both times was this year (was one of those when he came back from the throat injury?)  He's not in his prime any more.  That monstrous contract will bite them soon.

So, how many touchdowns (without the convert) do you give up before Vigneault remembers that kid Talbot did pretty well.

That's that game, yeah. Overall though, look out. You have Kucherov, Johnson, Palat, Stamkos, Killorn, Fillpula, Drouin, Callahan as a amazing nucleus of forwards - all young too, with the exception of Fillpula and Callahan. Hedman is also a very, very special D-man, Nesterov looks really sharp as well. They added Coburn and Stralman to a then weak blueline and made it a lot better and to add to that, they have a Vezina finalist in Bishop that they pretty much literally stole from Ottawa and if that goes south, they have Vasilevskiy waiting in the wings.

The class of the East for the next decade unless something goes drastically wrong IMO. A powerhouse.

Also, not sure if they showed the highlight, but Kucherov trolled Kreider pretty hard last night. He crushed him as Kreider came into the Tampa zone, Kreider lost the puck and the play went the other way. Kreider got mad, went after Kucherov and took him out big time, but in the process he took out Girardi too - and Tampa scored.

Kucherov. Kreider. Killorn.  Klein.  Klinberg. Kallahan.  That's a lot of Ks.

BTW, when I search "new york rangers roster" in google this shows up -- it's good to be "King".

Despres wins it for Anaheim

Despres for Lovejoy probably one of the worst trades of the year.

Horrible trade lol

SpezDispensed wrote:Horrible trade lol

Rutherford hasn't done much good for this team if you ask me. i'm not sure he would of been my pick for this team. pitts is trending down

The freaking TB/NYR series is impossible to figure out. Good for the Rags though to dominate like that. And by the Rags, I mean Lundqvist. TB out shot them huge.

You look at that Chicago team and that Anaheim team.... We are nowhere near being on that level. Hey Rooney. That's the difference between a team making the playoffs and being a contender constantly. Those teams are built well and deep. Luckily this is probably the last year or so for Chicago. NYR aren't too badly built either. Tampa's got the firepower but I still think they are a piece or two lacking to really challenge for the cup.(maybe I'm wrong, we'll see.)

Ducks unreal. Crawford showing why he's average.

Flo The Action wrote:Ducks unreal. Crawford showing why he's average.

Clearly you posted this before they tied it up and won in OT. Is Lundqvist "average" because he gave up 12 goals in 2 games? Crawford, lust like any other goalie, will have good games and not so good ones. Sometimes he makes a mistake, sometimes it's the players in front of him. Bottom line is he didn't let in that 5th goal. His SV%, even with three goals in under a minute, was .922. That's not average, by the way.

Flo The Action wrote:You look at that Chicago team and that Anaheim team.... We are nowhere near being on that level. Hey Rooney. That's the difference between a team making the playoffs and being a contender constantly. Those teams are built well and deep. Luckily this is probably the last year or so for Chicago. NYR aren't too badly built either. Tampa's got the firepower but I still think they are a piece or two lacking to really challenge for the cup.(maybe I'm wrong, we'll see.)

Tampa doesn't lack much. They are very young and everyone will get better. Kinda scary.

wprager wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:Ducks unreal. Crawford showing why he's average.

Clearly you posted this before they tied it up and won in OT.  Is Lundqvist "average" because he gave up 12 goals in 2 games?  Crawford, lust like any other goalie, will have good games and not so good ones.  Sometimes he makes a mistake, sometimes it's the players in front of him.  Bottom line is he didn't let in that 5th goal.  His SV%, even with three goals in under a minute, was .922.  That's not average, by the way.

Average in the type of goals he lets in. I'm not a big fan.

Flo The Action wrote:

wprager wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:Ducks unreal. Crawford showing why he's average.

Clearly you posted this before they tied it up and won in OT.  Is Lundqvist "average" because he gave up 12 goals in 2 games?  Crawford, lust like any other goalie, will have good games and not so good ones.  Sometimes he makes a mistake, sometimes it's the players in front of him.  Bottom line is he didn't let in that 5th goal.  His SV%, even with three goals in under a minute, was .922.  That's not average, by the way.

Average in the type of goals he lets in. I'm not a big fan.

He's certainly better than, say, Howard. I've seen him go on unbelievable runs. Chicago's only advantage over Anaheim is their playoff experience (and success), especially in goal.

wprager wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

wprager wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:Ducks unreal. Crawford showing why he's average.

Clearly you posted this before they tied it up and won in OT.  Is Lundqvist "average" because he gave up 12 goals in 2 games?  Crawford, lust like any other goalie, will have good games and not so good ones.  Sometimes he makes a mistake, sometimes it's the players in front of him.  Bottom line is he didn't let in that 5th goal.  His SV%, even with three goals in under a minute, was .922.  That's not average, by the way.

Average in the type of goals he lets in. I'm not a big fan.

He's certainly better than, say, Howard.  I've seen him go on unbelievable runs.  Chicago's only advantage over Anaheim is their playoff experience (and success), especially in goal.  

Well if you compare him to that. Compared to lunquist he's not the same animal. He's average. I feel his stats don't reflect his play. His play isn't that spectacular and there's enough bad goals let in.

Before you say it, I'm aware lunquist has bad games.