Toggle sidebar

2019 Stanley Cup Playoffs Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bench

Bench

3 is a good start
Aug 14, 2011
21,244
15,036
crease
Lazlo Hollyfeld said:
Agreed. One of the downsides of this forum is how it can color players or teams for me based on the ridiculous things fans post.
Click to expand...

So true. One has to remember this forum represents the fringe diehards. Many of the most vocal internet fans are stat watchers and obsess over every fine detail. Then there's the folks actually going to the games that have season tickets and might read the local sports column.

The best fan reads I get are in bars and arenas. And I need to remind myself of that here, too. In some ways we're ahead of the curve, but in others we laser focus on issues that simply aren't actually issues in the macro sense.

In short, our enthusiasm leads to some molten lava hot takes - for better and worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oddbob, Lazlo Hollyfeld and taliababa
Lazlo Hollyfeld

Lazlo Hollyfeld

The jersey ad still sucks
Mar 4, 2004
28,693
27,220
Claypool said:
Red Wings in 2002-03 weren't even the best team in the Western Conference, let alone the entire league.
Click to expand...

They were the defending Cup champs with a stacked roster. No one in Detroit cared about the regular season at the time and was looking to the playoffs.

newfy said:
Giguere literally had one of the best playoff runs ever for a goalie in 2003. If they win the cup it might be considered the best, hell it might actually be the best even though they lost. A .945 save percentage and a 1.62 GAA with 5 shutouts is absurd. Some of those guys might have better runs but not all of them and youre really splitting hairs if youre going to start really trying to put some above the other. At worst in 03, the wings got knocked by a top 5 goaltending performance all time.

The 03 team losing was definitely not worse than if Tampa gets swept by Columbus
Click to expand...
It absolutely was. Defending Cup champions. Stacked Hall of Fame Roster. Pre-salary cap. Losing to what you would call a mediocre roster at best for the Ducks.

I know a lot of people chalk it up to 100% Giguere because otherwise Babcock might have to get some credit, but I don't see how anyone could say Tampa getting swept by Columbus is worse. And yes Tampa tied the record for most wins, but they also did it in 3 on 3 era. The Ducks outworked and outhustled the Red Wings on top of Giguere's great performance.

The Blue Jackets are not a bunch of scrubs. They're a team who went into a bit of a tailspin at the start of the year and then have been on a tear headed into the playoffs.

The gap between Tampa and Columbus is simply not nearly as huge as Wings Ducks was. And Bobrovsky's current save % is .940 FYI, not too shabby.

We as Wings fans know all too well that regular season success doesn't count for much come playoff time.
 
Last edited:

plymouthmi

Registered User
Jan 17, 2015
181
129
Chicago
I agree that the "not built for the playoffs narrative is BS". I do think you have to raise your play and intensity level in the playoffs though, and it seems like Tampa was just coasting in at the same play/intensity level as the regular season. It's baffling. They do have the skill to come back from 0-3 but I have a hard time seeing that happen.

If they lose, I think just like the Red Wings in 96-98 how disappointing it looks depends on the next few years. If they never win a cup with this core, a loss this year (especially a sweep) will definitely be talked about.

Side note: I am so tired of seeing posts on main board threads comparing the 96 Red Wings and this year's Lightning talk about how the Red Wings were pre-salary cap and so stacked and spent so much money. I wish that narrative would die. Yes, they had a higher payroll than most teams but almost all their stars were drafted by them. That team was not build off a bunch of expensive free agent signings or anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 14ari13
Bench

Bench

3 is a good start
Aug 14, 2011
21,244
15,036
crease
stromlid said:
Side note: I am so tired of seeing posts on main board threads comparing the 96 Red Wings and this year's Lightning talk about how the Red Wings were pre-salary cap and so stacked and spent so much money. I wish that narrative would die. Yes, they had a higher payroll than most teams but almost all their stars were drafted by them. That team was not build off a bunch of expensive free agent signings or anything.
Click to expand...

You can't ignore the influence being able to retain all that talent with a huge budget. Before the cap, there were only a handful of teams truly competing due to that fact. No, you couldn't ONLY buy a team, but every single consistent contender spent the most money. Wings, Avs, Stars, and Devils had big budgets and big results. The real outlier was the Rangers, but they still got a Cup in there early on.

Before the cap you could count on one hand who top teams were with absolute certainty and maaaaybe they get beat by Hasek's Buffalo team in the early rounds. But that era was dominated by the teams that spent, plain and simple.
 

plymouthmi

Registered User
Jan 17, 2015
181
129
Chicago
Bench said:
You can't ignore the influence being able to retain all that talent with a huge budget. Before the cap, there were only a handful of teams truly competing due to that fact. No, you couldn't ONLY buy a team, but every single consistent contender spent the most money. Wings, Avs, Stars, and Devils had big budgets and big results. The real outlier was the Rangers, but they still got a Cup in there early on.

Before the cap you could count on one hand who top teams were with absolute certainty and maaaaybe they get beat by Hasek's Buffalo team in the early rounds. But that era was dominated by the teams that spent, plain and simple.
Click to expand...

I'm not disputing the fact that they had a greater ability to pay to retain their homegrown players. But I do think people have a tendency to conflate the 2002 team, which did have a lot of free agent signings, with the 1997-1998 teams which did not. That's what I'm tired of seeing.
 
The Zermanator

The Zermanator

In Yzerman We Trust
Jan 21, 2013
3,396
1,207
Flowah said:
I agree.

"Made for playoffs" is hockey-speak for "we don't know why this better team is losing but we need to make something up to fill airtime."

You cannot kick butt as much as Tampa did during the regular season and not be "built for playoffs." Tampa ran roughshod over physical teams, fast teams, skilled teams, good teams, great teams, bad teams all season long. Playoff games are tougher but it's not anything you haven't faced before in the regular season. Plenty of super tough teams played in 82 games.

This is bad luck + injuries to their 1D d-man + their goalie going cold and CBJ's goalie going hot.

Bobrovsky has won Vezinas. His rep as a playoff choker was undeserved. Eventually he was going to show his regular season form in the playoffs. Goalies go hot and cold all the time. This is just the perfect storm of bad luck for Tampa.
Click to expand...

I agree that 'made for playoffs' is meaningless. While I think injuries might play a factor, particularly to Hedman, every team in the NHL is nursing wounds by the time the playoffs roll around. But we can point to injuries, or goaltending being good or bad from either side, but there's still a trend of Presidents Trophy winners underachieving in the playoffs.

I think the biggest reason for this happening is that PT winners can be victims of their own success. Tampa has been steamrolling the league all season. I think there was an air of inevitability amongst certainly the fanbase, but perhaps even the team, that this was their year. It was fate. They'd taken their licks and learned from deep postseason runs that ended in failure. But they learned their lessons. And this year they hit the ground running and never looked back, dominating the league.

Then what happens? The playoffs come around and the intensity ramps up. This is playoff hockey, and many teams (especially the bubble teams like Columbus) have been in the playoff mindset for weeks, while Tampa just coasted to the postseason. Tampa is caught off guard, on their heels as they fall deeper into the hole. What's this? It's adversity, and it's the first time they've faced it this year. They don't know how to respond.

Best analogy I can think of is a fight between a house cat and a feral cat. That house cat can be bigger, better fed, better teeth, etc. But it won't match the ferocity and fight in the feral cat. And that's what this is. President Trophy winners spend the last month of the season worrying about things like resting up players, nursing injuries, etc. Bubble teams spend the last month fighting for their lives. And that's the mentality you need in the playoffs.

EDIT: Also in Tampa's specific case, you can't have your captain who is one of the best scorers in the league suddenly become a complementary (at best) scorer once the playoffs roll around. He's solidifying a reputation as a playoff choker and it's completely deserved. You need your best guys to be your best and the others to elevate their games. What's happened in Tampa is the opposite, their best guys have been no shows and no one else has stepped up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bench, Lazlo Hollyfeld and MintBerryCrunch
jkutswings

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
11,084
8,845
The one problem with that otherwise cool analogy is that the house cat beat the snot out of the feral cat for 20 minutes...and then rolled over and played dead.

Not having Hedman at 100 percent is absolutely killing them, but I lost count at the number of times their forwards would go coast to coast, generate a decent scoring chance...and there was zero probability of keeping the puck in the zone, because nobody would pinch to hold the point and keep it in. Just confused and disoriented all over the place.

If they were like that from the start, then ok, it's a clear letdown against a more desperate team. But to show themselves at their best, and THEN fall off a cliff...that's borderline maddening.
 
14ari13

14ari13

Registered User
Oct 19, 2006
14,134
1,224
Norway
Lazlo Hollyfeld said:
For the Wings? I know that.

That's why I referred to his playoff performances in Buffalo when talking about great all time performances by goalies. And I also listed Cujo as one of the Wings players on the 2003 team.
Click to expand...
All the core wings passed their prime by 10 years.
 
Last edited:

Invictus12

Registered User
Aug 1, 2010
3,722
208
New York
Uh, playoffs are a different beast. It's unlikely that teams meticulously prepare for one another during the season but come playoffs, hunger and coaching goes very far.
 
Christien

Christien

Registered User
May 1, 2010
5,148
3,555
Evgeny Svechnikov @‘d Ovechkin on Instagram and said “one two Freddy’s coming for you” :popcorn:
 
Nut Upstrom

Nut Upstrom

You dirty dog!
Dec 18, 2010
3,310
2,709
Florida
avssuc said:
He played amazing all game but that last shift was out of this world. Dude will get paid. I really wish the Leafs hadn't unloaded Clarkson.
Click to expand...

Yes, that final shift was a beauty. When the horn sounded more Leafs rushed to Marner than to Andersson - deservedly so after getting in the way of those Pastrnak bombs.

When they replayed his blocks I was hearing cash registers on each. The kid is ultra talented and seems to be heart and soul of that team. They are lucky to have him, but he's gonna get paid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: avssuc
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom