Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Bolts and Flames... who would've thought that at the start of the playoffs, much less the season? Just goes to show what an amazing game hockey is. Unlike other North American team sports, you don't have to have multiple superstar-calibre talents just to compete. Sometimes one or two stars and a handful of gutsy, dedicated players is all you need.
Awesome. ...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
careful with axes
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
|
Quote:
NFL: New England Patriots. Who is the super-star? Tom Brady? The guy didn't throw passes until the middle of his first Super Bowl winning season. The funny thing is they pawned off their superstar to Buffalo before the 2003 season. Troy Brown and Kevin Faulk are 'decent' at best, if even. NBA: San Antonio Spurs. They've only got one and that's the soft-spoken Tim Duncan. Is Fisher a star? I don't really think so. Robinson was a super-star at one point, but not in the last few years leading to his retirement. MLB: Florida Marlins. They were a bunch of nobodies + Ivan Rodriguez. They were abysmal through April, and then they hired a ONE MILLION year old manager and they schooled everybody, including the Yankees. They did it with one of the lowest payrolls in the game...and one of the lowest attendance figures too. |
|
quote |
New Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: over there
|
The Curse of William Penn strikes again
I'm glad we got to Game 7 and made it that far but we didn't even show up for that game. The better team definitely won this one and they deserve it. |
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Eugene,
You make some good cases in point, but I would say the Patriots were a total aberration. The Super Bowl champs almost always have a lot of star-power, either on defense, offense or a mix of both. Tampa Bay, St. Louis, , Denver, GreenBay and many others in recent years have often been stacked to the gills with talent. Basketball as well. I don't know their roster well, but in years past the Spurs had David Robinson for their championship seasons (though I think he played sparingly last year). They also had Steve Smith, whom I'd consider your standard issue all-star calibre player. Sean Elliot while frequently hurt, was also an all-star calibre player. Avery was a legit talent as well, even though he's very small by NBA standards. The point is, these guys were not unknowns the way most of the Calgary Flames and (to a lesser degree) the Tampa Bay Lightning are. And of course, the Lakers, Bulls and Rockets (11 championsips among them in the last 15 years) have all been poster-children for all-star / super-star rosters. Baseball is an odd case because if you look at season and post-season records over the years, the most talented teams dominate. But of course, hitting a baseball is such a fleeting thing that even the most talented players can be stymied for a series and lose their shot. Here I would agree the game can -- during some years -- be a great equalizer, but it doesn't happen that often IMO. The Marlins last year were a good example of a team without many stars who excelled, the Marlins from 97 were not a good example of that IMO. But when you look at the bottom line, it's teams like the Yankees, Mariners, Red Sox, and Braves that dominate the regular season year after year and are often found playing in late September or October. Even the Angels, A's Indians and Astros of the world (teams that have a good amount of success from year to year but are never locks for the post-season) have many star players on their rosters. Almost every single year. When you look at hockey though, it's a different story. Look at the two most successful teams over the last decade (the Red Wings and Devils). Six Cups among them, but only the Red Wings could claim all-star calibre talent up and down their lineup. Yzerman, Federov (prior to this season), Shannahan, Whitney (this season only), Lidstrom, Draper... although they have never had an all-star calibre goalie IMO, which is rare for NHL champions. But the thing is, other than Yzerman and Lidstrom, most of those guys would not be all-stars if they played for other teams. The reason they've had such success over the years is Scottie Bowman's team concept and having everyone on that team, buy into it and play their specific role (even though it could mean hurting their chances for a more lucrative salary due to lower stats), every single year. I can't stand the Wings but I can admit they have been the ultimate team most years I watch them. They are are a unit, almost always on the same page, never too high or low, always atuned to their coach and the flow of the game. The Devils have had a true super-star in goal (Brodeur) but only one perennial star on offense (Elias) and two on defense (Stevens and Niedermeyer) the years they've won the Cup. It has been the role players that have to knuckle up and carry that team when the three big-name skating players are not on the ice. Even Martin Brodeur can't stop pucks if his teammates don't take their man and play the game well. The Avalanche of course are poster-children for super-star rosters, but they only have two Cups to show for it over the past ten years. This year was a classic example of how having super-stars doesn't guarantee you anything in the NHL. The Avs were pre-season favorites to dominate the regular season, and the playoffs on their way to the Cup. They finished second in their division, fourth in their conference, and lost in the second round. The reason for that, is because in recent years Pierre LaCroix foolishly traded away their very best role players: DeVries, Yelle, Klemm, Podein, Messier... and one of the smartest coaches in the game, Bob Hartley. It's not the stars that usually win teams a Cup, it's the role players. This leads me to what is THE biggest difference between hockey and (especially football and baseball): the best players -- other than the goalie -- are on the ice for roughly 40 seconds at a time, then they're off for about 2+ minutes. In short, they play 18-22 of 60 minutes every single game. That means the unsung guys have to pick up the slack or there will be zero success. And by pick up slack, I mean punish the other team physically, score goals and sometimes help goalies make saves... not just "hustle". You can't say that about any other sport... that for 2/3 of every game, the little guys must carry the team. And many times, those little guys are matched against the other team's big guys on various shifts because of the way coaches control the flow of the game. Hockey is a sport where you either have a roster full of gritty players who know their role (checking, transition, face-offs, etc.) and are willing to do anything to accomplish that role, or you're going to lose. Football is a little bit like this in terms of the linemen, but often-times those linemen have to be the biggest and the best for your team to excel game after game. I still say over the last couple decades or so, hockey teams more than any of the other sports, live and die by the concept of team, of unselfishly playing your role every single night, even if you'd prefer or excel at a different role. You do what the coach asks and you don't bitch about it in the locker room after the game, cameras rolling, because hockey is always always about the team before yourself. You can even sense this in recreational leagues; it's hard to understand unless you've actually done it. Not saying the other sports suck or aren't exciting, just that hockey is unique in the way the teams play and win (or lose). ...into the light of a dark black night. Last edited by Moogs : 2004-05-23 at 12:09. Reason: Clarifications |
quote |
careful with axes
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
|
Speaking of previous champions...
Warren Sapp may have been a star, but Meshawn did basically nothing in his the last 2 years at Tampa. Simeon Rice is the next closest thing to a star on that team. That is not a household name. The 2002 Angels started a 5'6" short stop who can't even make the throw to first base without bouncing it in. They also had one of the lowest payrolls that year. And the 2001 Diamondbacks did have all-stars, but all were on the wrong side of 35 years old at the time. Frankly, I don't see much of a difference. Nothing that warrants elevating the NHL above and beyond for certain. Last edited by Eugene : 2004-05-23 at 17:56. |
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Well obviously it's somewhat subjective - everyone has their favorite sport - but having played all but football on one competitive level or another, and having watched a ton of baseball and basketball in my earlier days I'd say hockey more than the others depend upon "unsung heros" to win Cups. And the proportion of unsung heros and the amount of game time they log relative to the stars is larger than other sports IMO... but I do agree baseball has some fun moments with "unknowns" taking center stage.
Basketball and football I just don't think there's much argument for, generally. ...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
New Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: over there
|
Jeezus could you guys make this thread any MORE boring? Sheesh
|
quote |
careful with axes
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
|
Quote:
Also, look at the Memphis Grizzlies. They made a meaningful run at the play-offs with nobody. The tough thing about basketball is that only 5 players get a lion's share of the minutes. |
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Quote:
Tuesday can't get here fast enough.... |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Moogs, are going to update the standings? Or are you too embarrassed by your place in the standings?
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
A total abomination... my score that is. I don't think I've ever done so poorly in a pool. The odd thing was, I was going to rank Calgary higher because of how Kipper was playing going into the playoffs but I didn't think they could beat Vancouver. Homerism strikes again!
Anyway, sorry. I will get right on that; had a busy day yesterday. ...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Standings after three rounds:
scottiB: 165 CuriousBurb: 141 BuonRotto: 140 InactionMan: 132 Rageous: 132 Cam'rom: 132 Chinney: 128 Willoughby: 123 Moogs: 108 (broke 100, woo-hoo!) |
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
congrats scottiB
uncatchable. well picked. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON
|
Pathetic results on my part (no way to improve my score all that much at this point). At least I beat Moogs.
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
I screwed myself by picking Dallas and Ottawa as high as I did. I should've dropped those two lower (based on their streaky play) and added a darkhorse or two in the upper ranks. Also didn't help that I had San Jose almost at the bottom of the list.
...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
I guess scottie B is going to win.
To make it interesting we should have lightning round. Before each game pick which team will win and who will score the winning goal. If you're right - five bonus points! And if you get the right team but don't pick the player - No Points for You! Extra points if you declare the game will go into OT. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON
|
Quote:
Nah, it would be too random - and it would not give Scottie his due for good picks right from the start. We who picked Toronto or Detroit too high will just have to cry in our Molsons (actually, it would be a Brick Brewery product in my case, but the message should be clear). When there's an eel in the lake that's as long as a snake that's a moray. |
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
How about this: for every correct game predication I get 5 points, 5 more if I guess the score, and 5 more still if I guess the GW scorer. If I get two of three, everyone else loses 5 points also.
...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
New Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: over there
|
I just thought of something......is anyone here actually rooting for Tampa Bay?
< crickets > |
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Sorry. Can't in good conscience do that, not with Calgary's tradition and their fans and the fact that hockey is a Canadian game. Tampa Bay needs to spend a few more years building a tradition of their own before I'm going to root for them in the Finals. Better than having Florida or (God forbid) Atlanta in the finals I will admit, because Tampa has some very respectable players and a great playing style offensively, but no... I'm for Calgary all the way.
Even if they did squeek by [Lee Ermey]my beloved Canucks[/Lee Ermey] in 7. ...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
New Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: over there
|
Tampa Bay can't win anyway. No team has defeated the Habs in the Playoffs and gone on to win the cup since the league expanded in the 60s. It is TB's destiny to lose.
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Oooo. That's a good "obscure stat ª". I'm going to have to remember that one for future reference when the Bruins beat the habs and wind up playing the Canucks for the Cup. Would be a good series, dontcha think?
BTW, the Pens signed Maxime Talbot today... the kid has been unreal in QMJ this year. Will probably make the team from camp I imagine. ...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
What did Calgary lose? Do they want to make Canada cry? No more losing, Calgary!
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Calgary only played their game for a total of about 20 minutes last night. The rest of the time they allowed TB to dictate the tempo and style of play. That said, TB was on their game and made a good showing after a tough loss (as they always seem to do). I think Calgary had better find a way to win both of these home games or they could be in some trouble; the ice in Tampa isn't going to help their transition game much (which they obviously rely on pretty heavily with their counter-attacking style).
...into the light of a dark black night. |
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
red shirt ready for game three
*pours beer* go flames! |
quote |
Hoonigan
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
|
Whoa, Iginla and Lecavalier in a nice little tilt. Nice to see some emotion early in this game.
|
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
some nice hitting in the first, too
hope the rest of the game builds on that |
quote |
Hoonigan
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
|
I haven't seen hitting like that in a long time. Some REALLY good open ice hits... Lukowich almost had his frickin' spine bust in half when he got hit behind the net. Good old time hockey.
heh heh |
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
he shoots he scooooooores!
flames up 1-0 |
quote |
Hoonigan
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
|
He Scooooooooooooooooooorrrresssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2-0!!!!!! |
quote |
Posting Rules | Navigation |
Page 2 of 4 Previous 1 [2] 3 4 Next |
Thread Tools | |