Blues vs Canucks - Page 11 - 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 04-17-2003, 05:22 PM   #151
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:38 AM
please, you make your own luck

in a 7 game series you cant blame losing on luck, maybe if it was 1 game, but thats why it is best out of 7, to really determine the best team

the "luck", and "not getting the breaks" argument truly is the weak one.

it's the argument every loser makes. ive been reading the wings message boards and they are saying the exact same thing, no luck or breaks. why dont you just admit the other team played better than you and lose with class?
__________________

__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:25 PM   #152
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 10:38 AM
And so the fact they outplayed them in all the afformentioned areas has no barring for how well they played? You don't agree that the game of hockey is made up of all those areas? You don't agree that it is possible to play well, but still lose? If not, I can't argue with you, because you're not listening to reason.
__________________

__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:28 PM   #153
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:38 AM
yes you can play well and lose. but you cant dominate another team and still lose 4-1, which is what you are trying to say.
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:31 PM   #154
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 10:38 AM
On the first point: so are you saying the Canucks played well?

On the second point: I have to disagree. I've seen lop-sided scores that were *purely* the result of one goaltender playing poorly and the other standing on his head. Granted, goaltending is part of team play, but not the only part.
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:34 PM   #155
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:38 AM
i think you forget that the only stat that really means anything is the final score. all other stats are pretty much meaningless compared to that.

and yes the canucks played well last night, just not as well as us.
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:36 PM   #156
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:38 AM
Hey looks like the all knowing tsn agrees with me as well

from tsn.ca, check out the bold


Vancouver 1 St. Louis 4

Sports Network

St. Louis, MO (Sports Network) - Martin Rucinsky posted two goals and an assist as the St. Louis Blues pounded the Vancouver Canucks, 4-1, to grab a commanding three games to one lead in their Western Conference quarterfinal series. Game 5 is scheduled for Friday evening at GM Place in Vancouver.

Dallas Drake recorded a goal and an assist and Doug Weight added two helpers for the Blues, who once again kept the high-powered Vancouver offense under check. Chris Osgood turned aside 32 shots in the victory.

St. Louis has dominated the first four games, outscoring the Canucks by a 14-4 margin.

Markus Naslund scored the lone goal for the Canucks, who will need to beat the Blues three straight times to avoid losing in the opening round for the third consecutive year. The goal was the first of the series for Naslund, who finished second in the NHL in scoring this season with 104 points

Dan Cloutier stopped just 16-of-20 shots for Vancouver. (what a great "return to form" )

The Blues tied the score at 1-1 on Chris Pronger's goal at 4:35 of the second period. The defenseman attempted a slap shot from the point and the puck hit off a Vancouver player's stick. The puck then knuckled through the air and somehow found its way past a confused Cloutier.

Drake's tally would give St. Louis a 2-1 edge with 4:53 left in the middle period. Weight raced into the zone and dished a pass into the slot for Drake, who one-timed a shot inside the left post.

The Blues pushed their advantage to 3-1 on Rucinsky's goal with 5:51 left in the third period. Drake carried a puck into the zone on a 2-on-1 and sent a bouncing pass across for Rucinsky. The winger reached the puck at the bottom of the right circle and chipped a shot over a fallen Cloutier.

Rucinsky handed St. Louis a three-goal cushion on a backhand from the right circle with 4:14 left in the contest.

The Canucks had grabbed a 1-0 lead with 8:03 left in the first period when Naslund scored. Naslund skated near the blue line and wheeled to the top of the left circle, where he let go of a wrist shot. The puck sailed past a crowd of players before finding its way into the upper right corner of the net.


GAME NOTES:
Blues All-Star defenseman Al MacInnis missed his second straight game with a shoulder injury. MacInnis is expected to miss the remainder of the series with the injury...The Canucks went 0-for-6 on the power play, while St. Louis failed to score on five opportunities with the man advantage.
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:40 PM   #157
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 10:38 AM
Ah, so now you concede that the Canucks played well last night. So I assume you take back the following statement, or are you going to embrace the hypocrisy of it all.

"only a biased, blinded by fandom homer would think it is possible...[that] the Canucks played well last night."
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:42 PM   #158
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:38 AM
haha, ok, i meant to say "dominated" and/or "outplayed the blues", sorry, got a little over zealous
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:43 PM   #159
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 10:38 AM
That article is considering the 4 games as a whole, not individually. That's why the stats are combined. Sheesh.
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:45 PM   #160
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:38 AM
well considering we lost 1 of the games, it would have to be true that we dominated the other 3 games, because only dominating 2 out of 4 games could not be considered overall domination. thus, we must have dominated last night
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:47 PM   #161
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 10:38 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Chizip
haha, ok, i meant to say "dominated" and/or "outplayed the blues", sorry, got a little over zealous
So you don't think it is possible to outplay a team, but lose?
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:51 PM   #162
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 10:38 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Chizip
well considering we lost 1 of the games, it would have to be true that we dominated the other 3 games, because only dominating 2 out of 4 games could not be considered overall domination. thus, we must have dominated last night
Yes, but the article is using the combined stats - even those from the Canucks victory, which, according to you logic, would have been a game in that the Canucks dominated. Therefore, they are not using the number of games to define "domination" but the number of total goals for and against. It's inherent in the article.
__________________
Michael Griffiths is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:52 PM   #163
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:38 AM
it is possible, but usually when that happens it is usually a 1 or 2 goal differential, not 3. and if you lost than there had to be some area where you did get outplayed, and last night it was in goal.

so how much weight do you put on goaltenders when you try to determine who outplayed who? it's all very subjective. but i really think there are only rare exceptions when you lose by 3 goals in which you outplayed the opponent. last night was not one of those instances.
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:57 PM   #164
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:38 AM
well anyway you look at it, the blues have dominated this series, including last night.

not bad for a team with 2 captains out to injury, and another key player out.

especially againt an "elite" team.
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:59 PM   #165
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Michael Griffiths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Playa Del Carmen, Mexico
Posts: 3,925
Local Time: 10:38 AM
I agree the Canucks were outplayed in goal, but I think the other areas in which they outplayed the Blues made up for it in terms of over-all play. You have to factor in all the lines, all the chances by each of them, all the shots on goal (and lack thereof by the Blues), all the face-offs, the amount of puck possession, the amount of winning the battles along the boards for lose pucks, etc, etc. If you take all of it into account, the Canucks out-played them. You can't factor in the goals scored, because we are trying to figure out who played better regardless of victory. Since the goals causally determine the outcome of the score (ie, victory), we cannot use that variable.
__________________

__________________
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 05:38 AM.


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