Miscellaneous NHL Talk XIV

[Striiker]

Blackhawks Parade- 6/28/13, 6/11/10 both on Fridays

Bruins Parade- 6/18/11 a Saturday.

Phillies Parade- 11/1/08 a Saturday.



Kings Parade- 6/13/14 a Monday, and 6/14/12 a Thursday.


300,000 for a parade during the work week is pretty damn good.

If the parade was held on a Friday or Saturday, I'm sure the numbers would be much, much higher.

If it was during the weekday in Chicago, Boston, or Philly people would take off work and be there. Some businesses would probably close too.

 

[FlyingPhilly]

Phillies Parade- 11/1/08 a Saturday.

Kings Parade- 6/16/14 a Monday, and 6/14/12 a Thursday.


300,000 for a parade during the work week is pretty damn good.

Nope, Phillies parade was during the work week. I remember skipping classes that day to go. It was insane and one of the few times I had trouble walking in a crowd.

 

[RJ8812*]

Blackhawks Parade- 6/28/13, 6/11/10 both on Fridays

Bruins Parade- 6/18/11 a Saturday.

Phillies Parade- 11/1/08 a Saturday.



Kings Parade- 6/16/14 a Monday, and 6/14/12 a Thursday.


300,000 for a parade during the work week is pretty damn good.

If the parade was held on a Friday or Saturday, I'm sure the numbers would be much, much higher.

300k is pathetic no matter what day of the week it is

 

[Ryan120420]

Nope, Phillies parade was during the work week. I remember skipping classes that day to go. It was insane and one of the few times I had trouble walking in a crowd.

Your right, it was on a Friday.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Phillies parade was on Halloween. Tisk tisk that people don't remember. One of the best days of my life.

 

[FlyingPhilly]

Phillies parade was on Halloween. Tisk tisk that people don't remember. One of the best days of my life.

Well, I don't care about Halloween so I wouldn't remember it was on that day. All I remember is skipping classes to go and not much else, besides the large crowds making it hard to traverse

 

[FlyTimmo]

300k is pathetic no matter what day of the week it is

It isn't that Pathetic. 300K is Los Angeles for Hockey is not bad at all.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Well, I don't care about Halloween so I wouldn't remember it was on that day. All I remember is skipping classes to go and not much else, besides the large crowds making it hard to traverse

I'll let it slide haha.

 

[Striiker]

It isn't that Pathetic. 300K is Los Angeles for Hockey is not bad at all.

So your defense for them having a relatively small number of people there, which means they don't have many fans, is that 300k is a lot for a team without many fans...?

wut

 

[RJ8812*]

It isn't that Pathetic. 300K is Los Angeles for Hockey is not bad at all.

 

[Protest]

Nope, Phillies parade was during the work week. I remember skipping classes that day to go. It was insane and one of the few times I had trouble walking in a crowd.

I remember having a midterm and not being able to go

We tried to get the professor to move it back, but he was a Mets fan.

 

[Ryker]

Haha, just saw one of the global moderators had this as his signature: 'Asked what the recipe for success is, Bryzgalov said there is no such thing, explaining, "You can't just add paprika."'

With that, I also stumbled upon this:

Suter was partly amused and partly flabbergasted when Bryz- galov encouraged Jets fans to taunt him while the Jets were circling the puck in the offensive zone. With Bryzgalov waving his arms to the tune of “Il-ya, Il-ya,” the goalie suddenly had to drop into his butterfly to stop a point shot.

After a line change, Suter skated to Bryzgalov, whom he kiddingly calls “Vladimir,” and told him, “Hey, if they score, you’re going to look like an idiot.”

Bryzgalov’s reply? “Yeah, I know, but it’s just how it is. Tradition,” Suter laughed as he imitated Bryzgalov’s thick Russian brogue. “He’s a good dude.”

Good stuff, as always

 

[Beef Invictus]

Bryzgalov, keeping his priorities straight.

 

[Curufinwe]

What's he done now?

 

[flyershockey]

Bryzgalov, keeping his priorities straight.

That's why that guy won't ever win a thing in this league. He can't be bothered to take things serious even when his back is against the wall.

 

[Beef Invictus]

What's he done now?

He was taunting the crowd instead of focusing on the team actively trying to score on him.

 

[Ryker]

That's why that guy won't ever win a thing in this league. He can't be bothered to take things serious even when his back is against the wall.

Can you elaborate on your definition of a "thing"? What is a "thing"? Only the Vezina and the Conn Smythe?

 

[Beef Invictus]

Can you elaborate on your definition of a "thing"? What is a "thing"? Only the Vezina and the Conn Smythe?

Uh...he never won either.

 

[Ryker]

Uh...he never won either.

Yeah, and he never will. That's why I was asking him to elaborate on his definition of a "thing". Because, I, for example, consider the Stanley Cup a "thing". If he only considers those two, then a bunch of goalies are **** out of luck, not just Bryzgalov.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Yeah, and he never will. That's why I was asking him to elaborate on his definition of a "thing". Because, I, for example, consider the Stanley Cup a "thing".

He was along for the ride. I wouldn't exactly call Ben Eager a "winner," for instance.

What has Bryz done since that screams "winner?"

 

[Ryker]

He was along for the ride. I wouldn't exactly call Ben Eager a "winner," for instance.

So he didn't win the Stanley Cup then? I mean, he wasn't on the team? I consider players on a team, or at least those playing in some of the playoff games, as part of it, so I say they "won" the Stanley Cup.

Anyway, it doesn't matter, it's semantics, I know what he meant.

What has Bryz done since that screams "winner?"

Nothing.

 

[flyershockey]

Can you elaborate on your definition of a "thing"? What is a "thing"? Only the Vezina and the Conn Smythe?

I obviously meant as a starter. I'm well aware that he played in a handful of games in 2007 behind a stacked Anaheim team that went on to win the cup without him playing a single game in the finals.

 

[Striiker]

So he didn't win the Stanley Cup then? I mean, he wasn't on the team? I consider players on a team, or at least those playing in some of the playoff games, as part of it, so I say they "won" the Stanley Cup.

Anyway, it doesn't matter, it's semantics, I know what he meant.

Nothing.

What's the point of arguing and pretending to be stupid by acting like you don't understand what people meant? Any reason other than trying to be annoying?

 

[Ryker]

What's the point of arguing and pretending to be stupid by acting like you don't understand what people meant? Any reason other than trying to be annoying?

No, my point was that he obviously wasn't that bad, and that, by my definition, he did "win" the Stanley Cup. He played ~20% of the minutes in the playoffs, so while, yes, he wasn't a starter, he put up a good save percentage and was, in my opinion, an integral part of the team. If not, why are we even having debates about backup goalies?

And if I was to argue further, I would say his antics aren't the reason he won't win any individual trophies and probably won't be a starter on a Stanley Cup winning team. He's just not good enough, and I don't think I've ever heard of him not wanting to bear down and train to get to that level. So I think he did approach things seriously enough and that his antics are more an expression of his personality and disappointment he's not achieving what he hoped to.

 

[Striiker]

No, my point was that he obviously wasn't that bad, and that, by my definition, he did "win" the Stanley Cup. He played ~20% of the minutes in the playoffs, so while, yes, he wasn't a starter, he put up a good save percentage and was, in my opinion, an integral part of the team. If not, why are we even having debates about backup goalies?

And if I was to argue further, I would say his antics aren't the reason he won't win any individual trophies and probably won't be a starter on a Stanley Cup winning team. He's just not good enough, and I don't think I've ever heard of him not wanting to bear down and train to get to that level. So I think he did approach things seriously enough and that his antics are more an expression of his personality and disappointment he's not achieving what he hoped to.

I'm not even talking about Bryz at all, I'm saying I don't understand why you're arguing when you know exactly what he meant. His point was that Bryz's attitude is a detriment to him, not that he will literally never win anything.

It'd be like if he said Bryz would never win anything and I said he's wrong because I'm sure he'll win at least one more game in his career.