NHL Playoff Discussion Thread

[Asher]

It was a beauty play. Shame the guy who scored it will probably be suspended today. :sadnod:

[Supr49er]

I hate the Ducks. They match up well against us.
Time to take charge Joe.

[Asher]

Joe can't take charge. He's an overrated player who hides in the playoffs.

[Supr49er]

Joe can't take charge. He's an overrated player who hides in the playoffs.

Sadly, I think this has been the case. Another playoff failure and he might be the A-Rod of hockey.
Still, Go Joe!

[Flubber]

Ben Ben Ben-- ouch-- I don't usually agree completely with Asher but on the idea of playoff callups you are completely out to lunch. lets take your quotes one by one to demonstrate how wrong you are

Why don't all the other teams do the same and call up 8 more guys?

Because this is usually only relevant to teams that

1. are in the playoffs AND
2. whose AHL affiliates are no longer playing AND
3. whose management believe that young players benefit just from being around an NHL team in the playoffs

Oh ya and on April 13-- the day Calgary brought up six players from the AHL-- Columbus brought up SIX players from the AHL !!!! (Columbus Recalled forwards Mike Blunden, Maksim Mayoro, Alexandre Picard, Tom Sestito, defenseman Nick Holden and goaltender Dan LaCosta from Syracuse (AHL). )

It's never happened before, this is a loophole that needs to be plugged.

a mass callup of non-playing prospects happens every year with some teams-- see above. No loophole-- anyone can call up anybody for the playoffs without reference to the salary cap (I don't recall if there is a roster limit)

Perhaps you should have someone who can manage his cap competently. All the teams have to play by the same rules. If you are going to force a cap down people's throats, then you gotta stick to the cap. Calgary can't whine about injuries. We missed the playoffs a year ago because of injuries, and Calgary is whining about a lost division? Man, my heart bleeds for you.

Calgary abided by the cap-- They came close to it but that is all. I agree with you about whining about injuries-- one of the few times I agreed with you-- If Luongo wasn't hurt for a while maybe Vancouver wins the division in a walk --or maybe not-- In any event injuries are what they are and teams have to make do-- I never care for excuses and the reality is the Flames lost the division. The reasons are many and do include injuries but at the end of the day thats irrelevant.

They were called up just now, evading waivers. Real fair move.

Wrong-- Ericksson went through waivers. All the rest are prospects/rookies that have all been up during the year ( except Keetley IIRC) and who never went through waivers regular season or playoffs

Anyone could claim Erickson when he went down or when he came back up. Asher is correct in that the Flames parked him in the AHL at least partly due to salary cap issues-- They wanted cheaper defencemen like Pardy in the bigs as a number 6-7 plus they were pretty sure to lose a young guy like Pardy if the sent him down through the waivers.

Lots of teams do this. In a salary cap world, a higher paid player has to show he is really better than cheaper alternatives or a team WILL release him or send him down

Call em as I see em. This rule needs to be changed so that teams have the option of calling up 8 emergency players which count against next year's cap. That way teams that get screwed have an option of getting the players they need, but with certain consequences.

Fundamentally wrong again.

The consequence for the Flames being close up against the cap limit was that they could not bring up additional players. They played with 15 skaters in a couple of games so they already had the appropriate consequence.

The cap has never ever applied to the playoff rosters-- ever




Sorry Ben but your base premise that nobody calls up so many players was wrong. Many teams do this. Its an accepted practice. Most won't see ANY game action but the theory is that they benefit from the experience

[Asher]

You're way too nice.

[notyoueither]

I don't think any team can violate the salary cap.

All movements, trades, signings have to be registered with the league and approved. From what I've read the league calculates the impact of any change and will reject it if it would push a team out of compliance.

The only grey area left is the window where a team can be 10% over from July 1 to the beginning of the season. I have not read anything convincing about what happens if a team that is over does not get down in time.

In short, the Flames could not have done anything against the rules, since everything they have done would have to have been done with league approval as measured against those rules.

[Asher]

Yep

[Asher]

Vancouver's 1-0/2-1 games are so ****ing boring.

[Flubber]

Vancouver's 1-0/2-1 games are so ****ing boring.

Actually I thought last nights game was relatively exciting. The Blues hit the post something like 3 times. I am becoming convinced that Luongo's awareness of where he is in the net is so very very good that perhpas he knows to protect the net but not the post. He is playing so very well that I am freaking in awe of him.

The Canucks otherwise? OK but not exactly massively impressive. defensively they just collapse down and let Luongo be Luongo while they block shots. Sometimes it looks like a shooting gallery out there. Offensively they have had some good flashes but not very much sustained pressure. Overall a good team but not a great one so far. But they win--- It will be interesting if Luongo continues his mastery once they hit the road-- IN the regular season he was markedly better at home IIRC.

[Flubber]

Other series quick comments

1. MOntreal lost but did show some determination in coming back from down 2-0. Hopefully they will continue to play tough.

2. If Washington gets even reasonable goaltending they should beat the Rangers-- In game one all the Rangers goals were reasonably "good"-- (no super-weak ones) but at the same time all of them were also reasonably stoppable. To allow four such goals is not really acceptable-- I mean did Theodore make ANY difficult saves??

3. Carolina's OT win coiuld be HUGE for them. THis team looked great down the stretch. I still expect a battle though.

4. Pittsburgh is just getting it done so far. Philly will probably get a huge effort in game 3 but overall I just think the pens are a better team


In the West

1. San Jose-- its tough to blames your keeper when he only gives up 2 but the fact is San Jose dominated mostly but got outgoaltended. It must be frustrating as hell.

2. Detroit- They just win . I still find it tough to believe in Osgood but he has shown an amazing ability to elevate his game for the playoffs

3. Vancouver-- need to show more than their other-worldly goaltending


4. Calgary-oh Calgary Calgary Calgary--- Game 1 was frustrating on so many levels but a few comments

-- the Flames dominated about the first 25 minutes of the game
-- The Flames PP was not just unsuccessful-- it was a momentum killer-- They were going great guns and then WHAM they suddenly are skating slower, tentative
--I was cringing shortly after the Flames took that 2-1 lead as the team started to play very defensively-- I just knew that a defensive shell approach would not work

-- Kipper was good-- He made some good stops but Chicago's first goal was a bad one. NO one should be scoring from way over there-- Simply put Khabiblin was better.

Jokkinen looked very good at times. Iggy also had a few chances but both continued to have no success. A " good effort" is simply not enough from those guys-- They need tro start scoring

Bottom line on the night was

"bulin > Kipper
Toews > Jokkinen
Havlat > Iggy

The Flames d overall seemed ok. Even Eriksson ( who often made me cringe last season)-- Phaneuf seems like he is playing hurt somehow though.

The Flames role players seemed to do a good job-- although I simply do not understand how Dustin Boyd doesn't play in place of Andre Roy?


Overall the Flames showed they can compete with the Hawks. heck for the early going they dominated in a way I did not anticipate. But the question is whether that was just nerves for the hawks or something the Flames can replicate. So overall a good effort for the Flames but ultimately not enough. Frankly I am sick of good efforts. I wouldn't mind Kipper stealing a win they don't seserve for a change or perhaps the opposing goalie screwing up a few times--- arrrgh

[Sparrowhawk]

What do people think the odds are that the cup will be won by a team that has never won it before this year? In recent years Carolina, Tampa Bay and Anaheim all accomplished this, yet I wonder who could do it this year.

From the East, there is only one team in the playoffs that has never won (Washington) and they arn't off to a great start at this point.

The West has a few more (San Jose, Vancouver, Columbus, St. Louis) but with 4 teams having won it and 4 teams never having won, the odds should be about even for even making the finals (even considering seedings).

I picked San Jose to win the cup in Pickem, and still think they have the best shot, but not sure if anyone else from this list is likely to become a first time winner this year.

Anyone else think others are likely?

[action=Sparrowhawk][/action]

[notyoueither]

Vancouver could win it if they get their act together and Luongo wins the Conn Smythe.

[Asher]

If Vancouver wins, it'll be the single most blatant one-man win in NHL history.

[Asher]

The Flames need some of Montreal's grit.