If Samuelson did not Knee on knee Neely...

Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by J0e Th0rnton*, Mar 12, 2007.

  1. Would Pittsburgh have beaten boston in the playoffs in 91?

    An admin said I could remake this poll if I omitted the inappropriate poll options I left in the last one, so here goes.
    The last poll was left at 17 votes for boston winning, 7 for the pens still winning, and 5 for undecided.

    Now ill give my point of view.

    Cam Neely had 5 goals 1 assist in 2 games vs Pittsburgh in the 90/91 playoffs. Boston was up 2 games to none while he was in the lineup. In game 3, Ulf Samuelson was persuaded to take out Cam Neely, which is widely known. This turned the tide by removing Boston's biggest physical presence and top scorer, who was scoring around a goal a game. Pittsburgh came back 4 games in a row to go on to the finals.

    Either team would have easily beaten the Minnesota North Stars like the Pens did then, so really, this was a cup deciding injury.

    Its up to you, the fans, to vote

    a nice quote from before.
    also, a quote for those who say it was not intentional or dirty.
     
  2. So far, 2 more votes in each category. Adding it up from the other poll, that's 19 in favor of boston winning, 9 for the Pens, and 5 undecided
     
  3. Habs 4 Life

    Habs 4 Life No Excuses

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    37,538
    Likes Received:
    645
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Montreal
    Pens would have won anyways IMO
     
  4. Can you give reasons for this?

    I can Honestly say when Cam was in the lineup, it was a diffrent team. And he had more goals than Lemieux had points in the series before being taken out.

    Milbury is partially to blame because instead of playing hockey, he brought in 3 goons and decided to play "Get even, get rough" and the team lost focus.

    At the pace Cam was scoring.........he was unstoppable with regular play. Only a dirty hit could take the guy down.
     
  5. mytor4*

    mytor4* Guest

    too bad it wasn't a dirty hit . try watching the replay with your eyes .
     
  6. acr*

    acr* Guest

    I think Boston would've won the series had the hit not taken place, and it's not all about Neely's offense.

    Mike Milbury completely wigged out looking for blood and revenge instead of winning hockey, scratching his 3rd/4th line skill players for goons like Byers, Pedersen, Markwart, etc.

    Pittsburgh just kept on playing their hockey and outscored Milbury's band of enforcers.

    The B's were up two game to none at the time of the hit, went on to lose that 3rd game in the last period I believe. Neely's precense on offense and some of the skill plyers instead of goons would've made a substantial difference. Bruins win in 7.
     
  7. brownman*

    brownman* Guest

    '91 Penguins > '91 Bruins
     
  8. Wisent

    Wisent Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    3,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Mannheim
    Home Page:
    I don`t want to insinuate and it is also a little off topic but I just have to say t his. This knee looked more like an accident like anything else. They both skate towards each other both don`t move their legs (so actually it is just a matter of luck who knees who). This particular play didn`t seem intentional to me (and I know that Samuelsson was abrasive and nasty).

    Back on topic: it is impossible to tell who would have won this series.
     
  9. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,992
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    154
    I voted for the Pens. Its hard to say really. Go back to '93 in the Wings/Leafs series. In the first 2 games Yzerman had 5 points. The Wings were up 2-0. After that in the last 5 games he had two points and the Wings lost in 7. My point is that as a series progresses the stakes are higher. Yzerman looked unstoppable too. But the Wings still lost because he didnt come through after Game 2. I think there's few people who would put Neely as a better playoff performer than Yzerman. I wouldnt.

    Either way Mario was on a mission. He had the best playoff year possibly in history. I have a hard time believing that he wouldnt have stepped it up either way and outplayed Neely. If you think Neely was unstoppable - and he was - than what do you think of Mario? Could the Bruins have stopped him? Would he have not scored just because Neely was in the lineup? No. Just to prove it wasnt a fluke the Pens won the Cup in '92 as well. Just to let you know they beat the top 2 point getting teams in the league en route to the Cup. Then they swept the Bruins (sans Neely). Mario was on a mission either way. Sometimes on these boards Neely gets sentimental treatment on here and people dont look past his popularity. I liked him but I'm also rational.

    By the way:

    '91 Mario >>>>>>>>>>>> '91 Neely........8 days a week, sorry Bruins fans.
     
  10. GuloGulo

    GuloGulo Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
    Messages:
    3,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    trunkofacamaro
    He's never admitted himself that THAT particular hit was an intentional knee on knee.
    This is what he said to Aftonbladet a few years after the incident:

    "The coach had ordered me to confront him, in his lane, on every shift. It was an immediate collision course. Neely went straight ahead and me likewise. Went on like that during the entire game. Eventually it was (like) two trains steaming towards each other with neither turning an inch. I knew something would break in either of us, be broken, before it was over."
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2007
  11. Wisent

    Wisent Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    3,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Mannheim
    Home Page:
    True, this sounds exactly what it looked like. Neither giving an inch, just a matter of bad luck who breaks something first.
     
  12. RSBPC

    RSBPC Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    You guys are out of you mind. Watch this clip (props to 'canucksfan' for linking to it in the last Neely thread) and tell me it was an accident, or a clean hit.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tQsE3BIcKo

    He did the same thing to multiple players. I don't see how you can say intent wasn't there. As for whether or not the hit (or hits) are legal or not:

    Rule 71 from the NHL rulebook, word for word:


    I don't see how anyone can honestly say that it was an unitentional and/or clean hit.
     
  13. Wisent

    Wisent Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    3,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Mannheim
    Home Page:
    Well, if it is intentional there is no question for me. It is a foul. I was just questioning the intention. Seeing the other videos it makes me kind of doubt that. For me, to make kneeing sure, there had always to be the leg extension motion. You can`t see it in this clip so this made it doubtful for me. But I got to admit, he seemed to have a knack for making it look like accident (or perhaps it just was?).
    Admitted, after seeing these clips it seems fishy.
     
  14. Crazyhorse

    Crazyhorse Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,339
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Gothenburg
    It wasn't a clean hit, but it wasn't intentional.

    And no, Pittsburgh would still have won. The Pens offence was simply to strong.
     
  15. The clip shows clear intent. Notice also when Ulf collides knee to knee, he is always braced for it so he never gets hurt, but he always took out the guy he was after.

    His intentional high stick on Morrou, destroying his vision in one eye and ruining his career, is also legendary.

    Boston offense was stronger than Pittsburgh offense with Neely in the lineup. Neely had more goals than Lemieux had points in the series at the time. He was as much of a clutch player as Lemieux, just not as good as Lemieux.
     
  16. RSBPC

    RSBPC Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Was every knee to knee collision he was involved in unintentional? Or just the one with Neely?

    The evidence is pretty daming, IMO. I really don't see how you can conclude that it was an accident.
     
  17. Nalyd Psycho

    Nalyd Psycho Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    24,415
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    No Bandwagon
    Home Page:
    Samuelson's good. Marchment was always much more obvious. But, if you watch carefully you see two things. 1. Samuelson made no attempt to properly check Neely. 2. he made no attempt to get out of the way.
     
  18. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,992
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    154
    After two games? That's how you determine a clutch player? All-time Neely isnt even close to Mario in terms of a playoff performer. Neely had two great playoff years and one ('88) that was good. In Lemieux's two Cup winning playoffs he has 78 points. Neely has 89 CAREER playoff points. Apples and Oranges. Then there's other years that he didnt win the Cup but was still great in the playoffs. In '89 he had his 5 goal game. In '96 he had 27 points and even in '01 he scored probably a biger clutch goal than Neely ever did (game 6 vs. Buffalo tying goal with 1 minute left). So you mean to tell me that Lemieux's two Cups, two Conn Smythe's and 172 career playoff points are just on par with Neely's 89 points in 93 career playoff games? Come on.
     
  19. No, im saying that Neely was scoring 5 goals and one assist in 2 games, so Ulf took him out intentionally. Him being in the series would have evened the playing field. Not to mention Boston's Milbury was an idiot and got 3 goons for the rest of the series to play "Get even" instead of hockey.

    With Neely in the lineup, the bruins were a different team. Nobody is saying he is better than Lemieux. We are saying Boston would have won with his clutch, super presence in the lineup.
     
  20. devildan

    devildan Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2002
    Messages:
    2,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Seems like you have your answer already. If you want to make a poll, step back and let the people vote ... dont try to influence them.
     
  21. HandshakeLin

    HandshakeLin Now brought to you in glorious Shaw-Scope!

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    Messages:
    25,050
    Likes Received:
    1,640
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Occupation:
    Giving Your Kid An F
    Location:
    Praha, CZ
    Sounds like someone just can't let it go. I'm a pretty big Neely fan, but there's no way the Bruins win that series, even with him in the lineup.

    And for crying out loud, isn't this your 4th thread about Neely-Samuelsson in 24 hours?
     
  22. Yet they smoked the pens in the first 2 games, and at the beginning of game 3, cam goes out, and the pens make their comeback? Explain how boston was going to suddenly fold being up 2 games with their top player still playing the best hockey of any player in the series?
     
  23. jiggs 10

    jiggs 10 Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2002
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hockeytown, ND
    Home Page:
    The Pens would have won the series anyway. The fact that the Bruins won 2 games doesn't make that much difference to me. The Stars won against the Pens in the Final, but does that mean it was a close series? No, it doesn't and it wasn't. Much as it pains me to say it, Mario was multiple times the player Cam Neely ever was, and especially in the playoffs.

    BTW, I dislike BOTH players a lot!
     
  24. HandshakeLin

    HandshakeLin Now brought to you in glorious Shaw-Scope!

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    Messages:
    25,050
    Likes Received:
    1,640
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Occupation:
    Giving Your Kid An F
    Location:
    Praha, CZ
    Apparently they only play 3 game series in Nova Scotia.

    Pittsburgh was loaded during the cup runs. Their defense might have been average at best, but they were clutch and dangerous. Explain to me how the Pens roll over and die after two games, when they fought a very gritty Jersey team to 7 games earlier in the playoffs?

    Plus, as was already pointed out, Lemieux was money in the playoffs, so much more than Neely that it doesn't even matter. Furthermore, if you lost Lemieux (as they had for most of the regular season) the Pens would still find ways to win, with Stevens, Francis, Recchi, Coffey, and so on. Are you trying to argue that Boston was a one player team?
     
  25. reckoning

    reckoning Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,223
    Likes Received:
    95
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Exactly. Horrible coaching by Milbury. If he wanted payback, he should've kept the receipt for a regular season game the next year. His coaching mistake hurt the Bruins more than losing Neely.

    Would Pittsburgh have still won? Who knows...we can play the "what if" game but it doesn't change anything. Though if Boston had won the Cup, Ray Bourque's detractors would lose their favourite argument against him.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"