2019 Stanley Cup Playoffs Talk

Status
Not open for further replies.

Canes

Registered User
Oct 31, 2017
25,204
70,077
An Oblate Spheroid
Check the Flames GDT if you wanna see Flames fans blasting Hanifin for being bad :popcorn:
I've said it for awhile now, I think his ceiling is Jay Bouwmeester. And he's still not there yet. While that's a solid player, he'll always leave a lot to be desired.

But Lindholm, I've always been a stan for him and he has just been mostly invisible even after his incredible season. Probably predictable given his slowdown late in the season though.

He's not the object of Flames fan scorn now since he's new, but I imagine they'll be ripping him a new one in 2-3 seasons like they are doing with their two best forwards in Gaudreau and Monahan.
 

My Special Purpose

Registered User
Apr 8, 2008
8,151
21,787
Rantanen with the nice dish. Avs top players have been badly outplaying the Flames top players.

That's a big part of it, for sure, but Mike Smith just freakin' sucks. He looks like he's playing with his hair on fire, even making a routine save. I'm not sure how he became the clear-cut No. 1, but aside from the shutout in Game 1, he's looked really shaky. And with a guy like Rittich on the bench (who was better across-the-board in the regular season), I'm not sure why Pastor Bill hasn't changed it up.
 

Canes

Registered User
Oct 31, 2017
25,204
70,077
An Oblate Spheroid
That's a big part of it, for sure, but Mike Smith just freakin' sucks. He looks like he's playing with his hair on fire, even making a routine save. I'm not sure how he became the clear-cut No. 1, but aside from the shutout in Game 1, he's looked really shaky. And with a guy like Rittich on the bench (who was better across-the-board in the regular season), I'm not sure why Pastor Bill hasn't changed it up.
Smith was actually decent to start the series though. He really has little to do with how badly they're getting lit up as far as the series goes. Rittich might have bought them an extra game but they're absolutely toast either way with how bad they're getting outplayed.
 

My Special Purpose

Registered User
Apr 8, 2008
8,151
21,787
OK, I'll ask the question. We're now 20 minutes away from the two No. 1 seeds *combining* for ONE win this playoff season. Does something need to be changed? Are we giving enough of an incentive for teams to have play all-out for 82 games? If the playoffs are going to be a crapshoot from Day 1, why expend the energy to get a good seed?

IMO, there *should* be more of an upside to finishing at the top of the regular-season standings, but I have no idea what that should be.
 

Canes

Registered User
Oct 31, 2017
25,204
70,077
An Oblate Spheroid
OK, I'll ask the question. We're now 20 minutes away from the two No. 1 seeds *combining* for ONE win this playoff season. Does something need to be changed? Are we giving enough of an incentive for teams to have play all-out for 82 games? If the playoffs are going to be a crapshoot from Day 1, why expend the energy to get a good seed?

IMO, there *should* be more of an upside to finishing at the top of the regular-season standings, but I have no idea what that should be.
Finishing 1st in your conference still gives you the advantage of facing the #8 seed in the 1st round though.

It's the divisional #2 vs #3 that needs to be changed.

Just go back to how it was before. There was literally nothing wrong with that.
 

CaniacSZN

Registered User
May 20, 2013
379
652
OK, I'll ask the question. We're now 20 minutes away from the two No. 1 seeds *combining* for ONE win this playoff season. Does something need to be changed? Are we giving enough of an incentive for teams to have play all-out for 82 games? If the playoffs are going to be a crapshoot from Day 1, why expend the energy to get a good seed?

IMO, there *should* be more of an upside to finishing at the top of the regular-season standings, but I have no idea what that should be.

What do you mean by something needs to change? No matter what you do to the regular season or playoff format there’s going to be a lot of variance in the playoffs. In a game where so few scoring events occur you’re going to get a lot of different results. There’s nothing you can do to change it, just enjoy it.
 

Navin R Slavin

Fifth line center
Jan 1, 2011
16,369
64,803
Durrm NC
Sure. Put 18 teams in. Have the 8-9 teams play a best of 5 round for the right to play the #1 seed.

And then watch the #1 seeds lose anyway because they're cold from not playing for a week.

Want to make the regular season meaningful? Make the President's Trophy meaningful. The playoffs will always be a crapshoot to some degree.
 

The Faulker 27

Registered User
Nov 15, 2011
13,139
48,428
Sauna-Aho
It's amazing to watch a team like Tampa get swept by CBJ. They added a bunch of players and caught flack for it when they barely made the playoffs. Then proceeded to throttle one of the best teams in NHL history, and legitimately look like they could go deep. In the words of H. Ford.

never-tell-me-the-odds-gif.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad