2003/2004 NHL Season - Page 37 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-09-2003, 01:54 PM   #541
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 09:29 PM
I apologize Edgeman. You are right, I shouldn't take things so seriously. However, I must ask you a question: If your intent is to get me to react (as you just said it was fun to get me going like this), then why are you in the least bit surprised or upset when I do? I find that quite ironic, even a bit paradoxical.

Well, I have to get going... Kobayashi, I had a point regarding some even worse trades (Cam Neely comes to mind), but will wait till next time....
__________________

__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 02:12 PM   #542
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 05:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Michael Griffiths

Well, I have to get going... Kobayashi, I had a point regarding some even worse trades (Cam Neely comes to mind), but will wait till next time....
...till next time. you mean you werent happy with barry pederson?
if i have this sorted out, and thanks to the endless chatter of vancouver friends im certain i do, neely of course became cam neely and the draft pick became glen wesley who was dealt to hartford for two prospects: sergei samsonov and kyle mclaren.

so neely + wesley or neely + samsonov & mclaren. but hindsight is 20/20.
__________________

__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 03:19 PM   #543
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Lilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: back and to the left
Posts: 8,523
Local Time: 03:29 PM
wink apparently there's more than one victim of the words in mouth disease

Quote:
Originally posted by Michael Griffiths

Of course there's improving between seasons. My point is that 10 games of playing good hockey doesn't automatically make them Stanley Cup contenders. Sheesh, you guys are hilarious.
simmer now.

those 10 games were pretty important, the flames are within 4 points of the mighty canucks now. they're playing well as a team and are becoming a solid organization. i never implied that they were about to get into the finals.
__________________
Lilly is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 03:50 PM   #544
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 05:29 PM
WIM. dont let it happen to you.

Quote:
Originally posted by Lilly
they're playing well as a team and are becoming a solid organization.
plus, they have the best of the newer jerseys in the league.
__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 04:31 PM   #545
Babyface
 
Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: CANADA!
Posts: 11
Local Time: 04:29 PM
Leafs are on tonight!!
__________________
Elite is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 04:44 PM   #546
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 04:29 PM


too bad they will lose to the eliter blues
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 07:22 PM   #547
Babyface
 
Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: CANADA!
Posts: 11
Local Time: 04:29 PM
But the Leafs are Canada's most elite team. And as we all know, Canada is the home of hockey, making us Canadians higher on the hockey fan totem pole.

As far as fans go, Canadians are the most elite.
__________________
Elite is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 07:40 PM   #548
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 09:29 PM
Right on. That is the best name in the history of this forum. I wish I had thought of it.
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 07:44 PM   #549
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 09:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by kobayashi


...till next time. you mean you werent happy with barry pederson?
if i have this sorted out, and thanks to the endless chatter of vancouver friends im certain i do, neely of course became cam neely and the draft pick became glen wesley who was dealt to hartford for two prospects: sergei samsonov and kyle mclaren.

so neely + wesley or neely + samsonov & mclaren. but hindsight is 20/20.
Yes, you have it exactly right, kobayashi. Just think: If the Canucks had not made that trade and kept that first round draft pick, they would have had both Cam Neely and Glen Wesley in the '94 playoffs, the year they took the Rangers to game 7 and one goal of winning the Stanley Cup. If they had Neely and Wesley at the time, the Canucks would have likely won the Cup - probably in 5 games!

Worst.......trade........ever.
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 07:52 PM   #550
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 09:29 PM
Re: apparently there's more than one victim of the words in mouth disease

Quote:
Originally posted by Lilly


simmer now.

those 10 games were pretty important, the flames are within 4 points of the mighty canucks now. they're playing well as a team and are becoming a solid organization. i never implied that they were about to get into the finals.
Once again, I never said those 10 games weren't important. I fully agree the Flames are on a solid run right now. And I'm not necessarily disuputing that they have flourished into a solid team (there is no way of knowing for sure yet, really). But I'm not saying they have, either. I'm simply saying you cannot jump to that conclusion just because they're on a sudden hot streak. They've had these streaks before (they started out great a couple years ago), only to plumet back down to where they normally reside in the standings. All I'm saying is wait and see before concluding they have become a solid team (ie, not sub par). If history is any indication (ie, missing the playoffs for, what, SEVEN years in a row now?), then I'm leaning more towards them not being quite up to "solid" status yet, which is why I still call them sub par. Once again, 10 games do not a season make.
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 08:00 PM   #551
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 04:29 PM
so i guess we cant use the canucks first 10 games to declare them elite
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 08:14 PM   #552
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 09:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Chizip
so i guess we cant use the canucks first 10 games to declare them elite
No, we cannot, you are right. But we can use the first 10 games of the season and their play since Christmas of two seasons ago. They have won consistently since then. Did you know that NO other team has won more games than Vancouver from Christmas of 2001 until the end of last season? Talk about impressive. The 10 games at the start of this season were simply a continuation of that trend. Conversely, the 10 game stretch of good hockey the Flames have been playing are not a continuation of any trend, so given this change of context we would be wise to not treat it in the same manner.
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 12-09-2003, 11:55 PM   #553
Babyface
 
Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: CANADA!
Posts: 11
Local Time: 04:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Michael Griffiths
Did you know that NO other team has won more games than Vancouver from Christmas of 2001 until the end of last season? Talk about impressive.
I did not know that.


It's interesting though, that the Canucks play has been so consistent and so impressive, they don't have any Stanley Cups since 2001. In fact, the last time they were even finalists was in 1994 when they lost to the Rangers. Before that it was 1982 and they STILL didn't win the cup.


Now that's impressive.
__________________
Elite is offline  
Old 12-10-2003, 12:11 AM   #554
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 04:29 PM
we all know true eliteness comes from regular season success, the postseason is just a fun exhibition
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 12-10-2003, 12:17 AM   #555
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 09:29 PM
Yes, and the Blues and the modern day Maple Leafs know all about making it to the Stanley Cup finals, don't they? At least the Canucks have been to the finals in the last 10 years. When was the last time the Maple Leafs made it to the finals? Oh, that's right - 1967. Don't worry. Living in the past is a Maple Leaf pastime, afterall.

Touche.
__________________

__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com