2003/2004 NHL Season
- Thread starter Edgeman
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Pinball Wizard
Refugee
Indeed. Pursue such lofty goals as the President's trophy.
We all know that guarantees bigger and better things.
We all know that guarantees bigger and better things.
jealousy will get you no where.
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Sorry, I was just going by the 6-1 Shalocking the Canucks handed the Sabres a couple weeks back. I tend to forget that the Canucks can do this to any team, I guess.kobayashi said:
luv ya Michael! GO CANUCKS!!!
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
You were Bert for Halloween??? Oh my. Angel. You are far more attractive.
Back to the Canucks... Man, I love this team. They will hold the two most important defensive and offensive stats by tonight's end. With the Lightening being blown out 5-0 in the 2nd period by the Caps - courtesy of Lang and Gonchar, I might add
- the Canucks will now own the best goals for average *and* the best goals against average in the NHL. Not only do they have the best average, but they also lead the entire league in goals for. Two be #1 in both GAA and GFA is almost unheard of. I guess this is what elite teams do, though.
Back to the Canucks... Man, I love this team. They will hold the two most important defensive and offensive stats by tonight's end. With the Lightening being blown out 5-0 in the 2nd period by the Caps - courtesy of Lang and Gonchar, I might add
- the Canucks will now own the best goals for average *and* the best goals against average in the NHL. Not only do they have the best average, but they also lead the entire league in goals for. Two be #1 in both GAA and GFA is almost unheard of. I guess this is what elite teams do, though.elite teams also dont choke in the playoffs
you can be all giddy and shit but let me warn you, regular season success doesnt mean much in the playoffs
the blues were dominant a few years ago, winning the presidents trophy, beating everyone in their path. turek was runner up for the vezina with specatular numbers. now what did all of this get them. the presidents trophy, but no stanley cup.
turek imploded in the playoffs and the rest of the team didnt do so hot either and we lost in the first round. was that presidents trophy, regular season dominating team an elite team?
obviously not
so id hold off on the elite talk until they prove it in the post season, or youll end up looking like a jackass like you did last year when you proclaimed them an elite team, and they barely got out of the first round and choked away the second round.
you can be all giddy and shit but let me warn you, regular season success doesnt mean much in the playoffs
the blues were dominant a few years ago, winning the presidents trophy, beating everyone in their path. turek was runner up for the vezina with specatular numbers. now what did all of this get them. the presidents trophy, but no stanley cup.
turek imploded in the playoffs and the rest of the team didnt do so hot either and we lost in the first round. was that presidents trophy, regular season dominating team an elite team?
obviously not
so id hold off on the elite talk until they prove it in the post season, or youll end up looking like a jackass like you did last year when you proclaimed them an elite team, and they barely got out of the first round and choked away the second round.
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Yes, but then one would have to proclaim the NJ Devils an elite team, which I suppose, logically speaking, they would seem to be - but I'll NEVER buy that. They are the worst thing to happen to hockey in years, bringing the trap to unspeakably new and murky lows. They will never be an elite team... but look at all their cups.Chizip said:
Last edited:
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
If winning a Cup means dragging everyone else down to the lowest common denominator, then, as Bono would say, where's the glory in that? The Cup should be won with all the skill, speed, creativity and artistry that the best teams have. That's why seeing crap teams like Anaheim and Minnesota doing so well in the playoffs last year was suffocating the sport. The best should be deep in the finals. If they're consistenlty being knocked down by crap teams, there's something wrong.
well in my opinion, teams with the least talent who go the furtherst are the greatest teams of all, because a team is everyone working together to achieve a goal
teams with a lot of superstars who are individually skilled, but cant work together to achieve their goal, well they, in my opinion, are the crap teams
dont blame teams for coming up with boring systems that give them the best chance to win the cup, blame the nhl for allowing those systems to work
teams with a lot of superstars who are individually skilled, but cant work together to achieve their goal, well they, in my opinion, are the crap teams
dont blame teams for coming up with boring systems that give them the best chance to win the cup, blame the nhl for allowing those systems to work
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I agree with your last statement.
As far as teamwork goes, I don't think you need to be a crap team in order to have great teamwork. A super skilled team can also have great team work, but given today's NHL climate, it's more easy to drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator, and win that way. Such a pity.
As far as teamwork goes, I don't think you need to be a crap team in order to have great teamwork. A super skilled team can also have great team work, but given today's NHL climate, it's more easy to drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator, and win that way. Such a pity.
Pinball Wizard
Refugee
Michael Griffiths said:
First of all, they are an elite team... one of the few teams who can dominate a conference, and follow it up with playoff success. I haven't seen Ottawa do this, and despite their offensive prowess they are still considered a trap/defensive lock style team. Boring as hell... but I guess double standards make up for it, right?
Besides... expansion is the reason why boring hockey pervades... lest we forget Ottawa is an expansion franchise as well. Subject to the same scrutiny as any American counterpart.
The Canucks will not be Canada's elite team until they get to the finals. Toronto's success in the playoffs over the last few years overshadows a few decent regular seasons by a club with many question marks.
Maybe wait until later in the season Mr. Griffs... premature prognosticator.
Last edited:
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Every team in the NHL except for the original six were once expansion teams...so I don't buy the "Ottawa is an expansion team, therefore a boring team" argument. Ottawa is stacked, end of story. They've been around for a while now, and have vastly improved since their inception. They've got guys like Alfredson, Hossa, Havlat, Bonk, White, Reddin, Spezza, and so on. They're loaded with talent. Even though they do play a lock system to some extent, they don't completely rely on it, as they actually forecheck! What a concept. I only wish more teams would do it, instead of keeping four guys in the neutral zone at all times *cough* Minnesota *cough*. The difference between Ottawa and NJ is that Ottawa has a lot more talent and they play more aggressively (offensively speaking). As a result, they're not as boring.
Same thing with the Canucks, though the Canucks are more run and gun than Ottawa. They sometimes employ a version of the trap (which team doesn't?), but they don't rely on it even as much as Ottawa. They prefer to use the attack model, even encouraging the defence to join the rush at their choosing. It makes for a much better on ice product.
As for the Canucks being an elite team, we've already had this debate and got nowhere last year. You guys think you *must* win a Cup to be considered elite. I disagree. There are like 30 teams in the league, and only 1 team wins the Cup each year. I believe there is more than one elite team in the NHL in a given year. It's as simple as that.
Same thing with the Canucks, though the Canucks are more run and gun than Ottawa. They sometimes employ a version of the trap (which team doesn't?), but they don't rely on it even as much as Ottawa. They prefer to use the attack model, even encouraging the defence to join the rush at their choosing. It makes for a much better on ice product.
As for the Canucks being an elite team, we've already had this debate and got nowhere last year. You guys think you *must* win a Cup to be considered elite. I disagree. There are like 30 teams in the league, and only 1 team wins the Cup each year. I believe there is more than one elite team in the NHL in a given year. It's as simple as that.
Last edited:
Pinball Wizard
Refugee
Michael Griffiths said:
Ok, you just described Tampa Bay... Ottawa's sister franchise. I know you'll still consider them expansion... any team created in the last decade is still relatively new. Teams of that nature emerge from employing similar coaching philosophies to get the ball rolling... which results in boring teams. We've discussed this before.
So it's ok to be boring to win? I know I may be extrapolating too much from your words, but that double standard just keeps popping up.
A cup isn't necessary to be "elite". Contention for sure... but that is measured in consistency of performance. Ottawa is under the same evaluation, so it's appropriate to compare the two in that regard. Until they show they can win playoff series on more than a few occasions, they won't be mentioned in the upper tier. Do you consider Anaheim elite? They went to the finals one year... by your standards that's a friggin dynasty, so the answer must be yes! Obviously this is a ridiculous assertion. They are an expansion franchise... that stresses the fundamental process of team-building, and boring play. In that respect the Ducks haven't had time to become an elite team. They haven't repeatedly shown success as a team... and are looking to be a flash-in-the-pan story.
That is what separates them from a team like New Jersey. And, if Anaheim isn't considered elite... a team that has gone farther than current iterations of Ottawa and Vancouver... then how can they themselves be labelled highly by this hierarchy?
Again, the example is crude, but maybe it will expose some extreme subjectivity in your blatant fancentrism. Of which I have no accord.
Last edited:
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Cuj - There are far too many holes in your arguments (and words firmly put in my mouth) for me to sift through right now... and since I'm exhausted and am heading to bed, I will tackle these loose ends tomorrow.
pizazz!
the other difference is the devils beat the sens and went on to win the cup.
the cup isnt meant to be won with pizazz. its just meant to be won.
if you can win it with pizazz, then go ahead. but pizazz doesnt get you far when the other harder working team is chopping you down at your knees.
i dont follow this 'boring' argument. the playoffs last year were great. lack of scoring leads to very low mass appeal, but its still great hockey. evidently, it seems, this is all part of the game.
Michael Griffiths said:
the other difference is the devils beat the sens and went on to win the cup.
the cup isnt meant to be won with pizazz. its just meant to be won.
if you can win it with pizazz, then go ahead. but pizazz doesnt get you far when the other harder working team is chopping you down at your knees.
i dont follow this 'boring' argument. the playoffs last year were great. lack of scoring leads to very low mass appeal, but its still great hockey. evidently, it seems, this is all part of the game.
zoney!
ONE love, blood, life
defense wins championships
The loonies (in the "crazy" sense - not in the Canadian sense, although....
) don't listen to this line of argument Kobe. I tried to argue this throughout the playoffs last year. It obviously fell on deaf ears if they are STILL arguing it.
By the way...Colorad SQUEAKED ny Minnesota last night I see. The Wild seem to be creeping back.
kobayashi said:
The loonies (in the "crazy" sense - not in the Canadian sense, although....
) don't listen to this line of argument Kobe. I tried to argue this throughout the playoffs last year. It obviously fell on deaf ears if they are STILL arguing it.By the way...Colorad SQUEAKED ny Minnesota last night I see. The Wild seem to be creeping back.
zonelistener
ONE love, blood, life
:shhh:
Broken typer.
Broken typer.
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
That's a good one, Cuj. I just described Tampa Bay? Look over the roster and compare. Tampa Bay is a pretty good up and coming team, but aren't in the same league as Ottawa (well, they are in the NHL, but you no what I meanPinball Wizard said:
) To lump the two into the same pile is to blind yourself to the talent Ottawa has player for player. Ottawa, as I already said, doesn't employ the trap as much as less talented teams do. They do not rely on it as much. Maybe that's why they lost to the Devils? Probably. It's sad that teams like the Devils have to drag Ottawa down to their level in order to beat them.When did I ever say the Canucks were boring? On the contrary, I said they had the better on ice product, because they allow the defence to join the rush. I also said they sometimes employ a (rather sad) version of the trap, but don't rely on it to win. Every team uses the trap to some extent, only because the entire NHL uses it, and if you don't, you're not going to be competitive. The Canucks hardly ever use it unless they're sitting on a lead...and even then, it's more a lock than a trap. They still have two guys on the forecheck, and still attack and allow the defence to join the rush.
Which standards are these? I don't recall ever listing or espousing any such standards. On what grounds do you issue your contention? I never once said a team has to go to the finals in order to be considered elite... so you have no argument. In fact, I said the opposite. I agree with you that a team needs to show a high level of performance on a consistent basis. You believe it equates to several playoff series wins (which Ottawa has by the way), and I believe it can be drawn from a number of different categories, including regular season play.
Once again, it's a matter of high level consistency. Anaheim has never shown itself consistent at a high level, while Vancouver and Ottawa have... once again, over the regular season, and not necessarily the playoffs. Obviously the playoffs also need to be taken into consideration, but it's by no means the only thing.
Anyway, do you respect Steve Yzerman's opinion? If anyone knows what he's talking about, it's surely the best captain in the NHL. Here's what he had to say on the Vancouver Canucks after their 5-1 loss a couple days ago:
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/shownews.jsp?content=h110406A
"We just didn't generate anything five on five," said 38-year-old Steve Yzerman, who leads the Detroit with six goals.
He said Vancouver has developed into a well-balanced team since the Wings eliminated them from the Stanley Cup playoffs two years ago.
"All four lines are pretty effective now in one way or another and a little bit different. The Sedins with that young guy King scores two goals.
"They're a well-balanced team and 10 games into the season we're aware that they're one of the elite teams."
I guess Steve Yzerman must be wrong if we are to believe you and Chiz.
Last edited:
Michael Griffiths
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I totally disagree. Buffalo lacks the consistency (ie, a sustained high level of performance over at least a couple of seasons) to be considered elite. A good barometer are the players' opinions. Most players, I would have to think anyway, do not consider Buffalo elite. Apparently Steve Yzerman believes Vancouver is elite, and who am I to question Stevie Y?
Similar threads
