2013 Stanley Cup Playoffs

jaxvid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Messages
7,246
Location
Michigan
The Red Wings go up 2 games to 1 against Chicago. It's far from over and I still think it will be tough for the Wings to beat them in seven but the two wins have been very enjoyable. Could this be setting up a Penguins vs. Red Wings Cup final? Don got the best of that one last time, but in hockey you never know.
 

jaxvid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Messages
7,246
Location
Michigan
Before the puck was dropped between the Blackhawks and the Red Wings there was a moment of silence for the tragedy earlier in the week in Oklahoma. WTF? It's Detroit. Every weather mishap across the globe is a reason to mourn? I understand there was a mud slide in India that killed thousands, is MLB going to postpone some games in support? I guess part of being a global citizen is giving a sh*t about what happens to people you don't know in places you've never been?
 

jaxvid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Messages
7,246
Location
Michigan
Thriller in Chicago, game 7 into OT against the Red Wings. Wings were bailed out on a waved off goal with a minute left due to a whistle down ice. Nothing like game 7 OT.
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,583
Location
Pennsylvania
The two Western Conference series were as tightly matched as could be. Tough losses for the Sharks and especially the Red Wings, who had a 3-1 series lead.

Fantastic final four left as not only the defending champion Kings are trying to repeat, the three most recent Stanley Cup winners before them stand in their way. Don't know if that's ever been the case before. Should be two great conference finals. I'd love to see the Penguins try to keep LA from repeating in the final, but Pitt-Chi would be fine too, any combination that doesn't include Boston will work. :pray:
 

Matra2

Master
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
2,337
A Pittsburgh v Chicago final would be ideal. I fear though that the boring LA Kings are going to go through on the West thus suppressing ratings in the final series. BTW the Rangers Bruins game on NBC last Saturday doubled Fox's TV audience size for its baseball.:thumbup:
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,583
Location
Pennsylvania
Game 1 of the Penguins-Bruins series was a strange one as the Penguins played a very strong game yet still lost 3-0. I think they're the stronger team and will prevail, but of course they better win Game 2 tomorrow or they will be in a deep hole.
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,583
Location
Pennsylvania
The Bruins totally dominated Game 2; that was painful to watch. Looks very bleak now for the Penguins, Game 3 in Boston will be their last stand, they better give it all they have including getting back to basics rather than repeating tonight's pretty gutless performance (or "epic fail" as one Pittsburgh writer aptly called it).
 

Matra2

Master
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
2,337
Even if Iginla had scored that open night he missed in the first period I think the Bruins still would've won. Crosby messed up right in the first minute handing the Bruins an early goal - though Vokoun was not positioned right for it. At no time from the second period on did the Pens look like they would come back. Fleury conceded a goal in his first shot. Without sounding like Captain Obvious maybe they should get a new goalie in the off season.
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,583
Location
Pennsylvania
The Penguins panicked when Marchand scored half a minute into the game on a breakaway on Crosby's turnover (along with the defensemen being out of position). They were already frustrated at their inability to score in Game 1, and instantly got away from their game plan. But their game plan seemed to consist of trying one long stretch pass after another, which Boston easily foiled just as the Islanders did against Pittsburgh in the first round. Claude Julien is way outcoaching Dan Bylsma, who is very weak at making in-game adjustments.

As far as Fleury, the Penguins had a slight chance of getting back in the game after Vokoun was pulled for Fleury and they finally got their first goal of the series to make the game 3-1 Boston. But Fleury immediately let in a soft goal on the first shot he faced. He is the master of letting in back-breaking soft goals. A laugh track should be put in over the PA system every time he's in the game.

At any rate, the Penguins only slight chance of getting back in the series is to stick with Vokoun and play solid defense with multiple short passes down the ice to try and generate offense, the same way they adjusted to the Islanders. But they are a very undisciplined team, with the league's number one "country club" atmosphere for players going back to the playing days of Mario Lemieux himself. They need a hard-nosed coach and had one in Michel Therrien, but they rebelled against him even after he led them to the Cup final in '08. I'm hoping Bylsma is fired, Fleury dumped, and discipline instilled in the team as they are geared for strong regular seasons but not for the nitty gritty aspects of playoff hockey.
 

jaxvid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Messages
7,246
Location
Michigan
Boston Bruins vs. Chicago Black Hawks!! Original Six. When was the last time that happened? Without checking I'm gonna guess 1966 Toronto vs. Chicago??? Before expansion. I know the Red Wings haven't play an original six Final Round since the league expanded, the Maple Leafs haven't been in a Cup final, the Rangers only once, I think, and the Bruins a couple of times but only recently where they would play a team from the West where only Detroit and Chicago are original six. Montreal had a bunch of Cup finals in the 1970's-80's but none of the other original teams were any good then.

Anyone have a better guess? (without checking).
 

Extra Point

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
6,289
I don't know but a hockey fan told me 1979.
 

Rebajlo

Mentor
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
1,521
Location
N.S.W. - Australia
Just a word or two about the Penguins' embarrassing 0-4 elimination by Boston: Pittsburgh's mega-stars Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin failed to register a single point between them for the duration of the entire series. That sad statistic speaks volumes...

I'm hoping the Bruins shall emerge as champions. Why? Let's look at Game 1: Chicago's goalscorers included the black "Swede" Johnny Oduya and the half-Syrian Brandon Saad. What's the bet that if (worst luck...) the Blackhawks win the Cup Oduya shall be right next to the trophy in all of the celebratory post-game photographs splashed across newspapers and screens worldwide..?
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,583
Location
Pennsylvania
Chicago scored 4 goals in Game 1, or twice the amount the Penguins scored in four games against Boston. There's a number of explanations, one of the biggies being that no Penguins would park in front of the Boston net and try to jam home rebounds. Unfortunately they're a pretty gutless team, and now Ray Shero has given Dan Bylsma a two-year extension as a reward for the team being bounced early from the playoffs for four straight years, and also says that Marc-Andre Fleury is still the team's franchise goalie. In other words, the Penguins will continue to be an entertaining high scoring regular season team, followed by flopping in the playoffs.

I find myself inexplicably rooting somewhat for the Bruins to beat the Blackhawks. Must be Stockholm Syndrome. :noidea:
 

Matra2

Master
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
2,337
Don, the Bruins bullied Crosby in the first game and got away with it. I read in the Canadian media that once it was clear they could bully Crosby and Malkin and get away with it without any response from the Pens (or officials) the series was over. In game 2 the Pens got off to a terrible start, in part thanks to a Crosby mistake, but the "physicality" of Boston continued. They did the same thing to Vancouver two years ago. Also, in the playoffs, in general, teams are allowed to get away with more than in the regular season without incurring a penalty because of the pressure to "let 'em play". In game three there should've been numerous penalties called against the Bruins for their clutching and grabbing of Malkin but the officials kept their whistles silent.

I find myself preferring Chicago in part because of their more exciting style of play compared to the clutch and grabbers of Boston. But I also want Boston to lose because of how that city reacted to the marathon bombing by cheering on full scale martial law. Boston Strong. Ha! More like: Boston= Panty Piddling Nancy Boys. Not that Obama's Chicago would react much better, but still.
 

jaxvid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Messages
7,246
Location
Michigan
Don, the Bruins bullied Crosby in the first game and got away with it. I read in the Canadian media that once it was clear they could bully Crosby and Malkin and get away with it without any response from the Pens (or officials) the series was over. In game 2 the Pens got off to a terrible start, in part thanks to a Crosby mistake, but the "physicality" of Boston continued. They did the same thing to Vancouver two years ago. Also, in the playoffs, in general, teams are allowed to get away with more than in the regular season without incurring a penalty because of the pressure to "let 'em play". In game three there should've been numerous penalties called against the Bruins for their clutching and grabbing of Malkin but the officials kept their whistles silent.

I find myself preferring Chicago in part because of their more exciting style of play compared to the clutch and grabbers of Boston. But I also want Boston to lose because of how that city reacted to the marathon bombing by cheering on full scale martial law. Boston Strong. Ha! More like: Boston= Panty Piddling Nancy Boys. Not that Obama's Chicago would react much better, but still.

As a long suffering Red Wing fan who over the last 20 years would see a regular season scoring machine of a team turn to dust in the playoffs because of the inability of the refs to contain the kind of clutching, grabbing, and dirty play, that went punished in the regular season, I too would like to see Chicago win. The Blackhawks can play both ways, smart and tough. They really have a good team. The regular season was not a fluke. I think the Bruins are built for the playoffs and can make a push but the Blackhawks should have the edge.

As for picking one city over the other??? Not much of an option either way.
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,583
Location
Pennsylvania
Don, the Bruins bullied Crosby in the first game and got away with it. I read in the Canadian media that once it was clear they could bully Crosby and Malkin and get away with it without any response from the Pens (or officials) the series was over. In game 2 the Pens got off to a terrible start, in part thanks to a Crosby mistake, but the "physicality" of Boston continued. They did the same thing to Vancouver two years ago. Also, in the playoffs, in general, teams are allowed to get away with more than in the regular season without incurring a penalty because of the pressure to "let 'em play". In game three there should've been numerous penalties called against the Bruins for their clutching and grabbing of Malkin but the officials kept their whistles silent.

I find myself preferring Chicago in part because of their more exciting style of play compared to the clutch and grabbers of Boston. But I also want Boston to lose because of how that city reacted to the marathon bombing by cheering on full scale martial law. Boston Strong. Ha! More like: Boston= Panty Piddling Nancy Boys. Not that Obama's Chicago would react much better, but still.

I thought the series was fairly officiated. There were a couple of penalties that should have been called when Crosby was roughed up, but there were plenty of ticky tacky calls on both teams; the way interference in particular is now called has taken away a lot of the physical play that used to exist.

Going after the opposing team's star or stars has always been a smart strategy. I also think Crosby wasn't fully recovered from his nasty broken jaw plus he had to play with a full visor on which he wasn't used to. The Penguins plain panicked in Game 1 when they didn't score in the first two periods despite coming out of the gates very strongly. Crosby was jostling with Chara and even pushed Rask, which was a classless move. Malkin was tussling with Bergeron. The same stupid stuff they did when they imploded against the Flyers in the playoffs last year.

Game 2 they simply had no idea had to play Boston, even though they had beaten them all three times in the regular season, and were thoroughly embarrassed. Games 3 and 4 they played very hard and could have won either or both games, but by then they had forgotten how to score. They did almost everything well in those two games, but what they didn't do was drive hard to the net and plant forwards in front of Rask whenever possible. Rask always had a clear view of the shots coming at him, and there was rarely a rebound, and when there was there was often no Penguins forward close enough by to ram the puck home. Boston clusters defensively in front of their net and that was the only way for Pittsburgh to counter it effectively to get some goals and force the Bruins to open up a bit.

The Bruins effectively countered what the Penguins were doing when they opened Game 1 so strongly, but the Penguins never adapted to the Bruins style of play. Bylsma is to blame, but so are the players for not putting a lot more pressure on Rask in front of the goal. Boston is an excellent team and the Penguins gave the series away on home ice those first two games.
 
Top