2019 Stanley Cup Playoffs Talk

[zman77]

San Jose were down 3-0 in Game 7.
They win the game 5-4 in OT!!
Highlights:

 

[DougieSmash]

Can't decide which of Bruin and CBJ I hate more.

 

[Negan4Coach]

Thank goodness the 'Canes did not trade for Nylander!

I'll bet all the Toronto fans on here want return a threads where they shit all over every single Carolina D for Toronto F proposals. Muahahahahaha

 

[Negan4Coach]

San Jose were down 3-0 in Game 7.
They win the game 5-4 in OT!!
Highlights:

Holy Dogshit what kind of wide-open play do these teams engage in. Its so unlike the hockey I'm used to watching.

 

[Cardiac Jerks]

Holy Dog**** what kind of wide-open play do these teams engage in. Its so unlike the hockey I'm used to watching.

Vegas was up 3-0 before getting assessed a weak major penalty. San Jose scored 4 on the 5 min powerplay.

 

[Negan4Coach]

Vegas was up 3-0 before getting assessed a weak major penalty. San Jose scored 4 on the 5 min powerplay.

my god. But you don't see as much whining about that online as you did the WAS goal that was waived off the other night.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Vegas was up 3-0 before getting assessed a weak major penalty. San Jose scored 4 on the 5 min powerplay.

I'm torn on this, but I see both sides of it. I believe the rulebook says the ref can use discretion on a cross-checking to assess a major if there is injury (paraphrasing, so something like that) so while the cross-check itself, wasn't overly egregious (although it was pretty forceful and unnecessary in the sense that it wasn't made in an attempt to make a play), the result clearly was.

There was some question on the Foegele play on Oshie. That was touch and go in terms of a major and we were lucky that it wasn't, but I can see a bit of a distinction as to why it was called as it was, at least in my mind. Foegele was trying to make a play on Oshie who had the puck and first tried to lift his stick and gave him a little shove which turned out bad for Oshie. Point is, all of the action was done in an attempt to make a hockey play on a guy with the puck and wasn't a very forceful push at all.

In this SJ case, the puck was already gone back to the point when Eakins decided to cross-check Pavelski and then Stastny(?) made it worse by shoving an already off balance Pavelski to the ground. If Pavelski isn't injured, it's a 2 min. cross checking penalty. Right or wrong, the injury (along with the fact that the infraction wasn't made while trying to make a play on the puck or anything) turned it into a major so as I said, I can see both sides of it. Not sure if it was in retaliation to something else, but it seemed like a pretty unnecessary play by Eakins, which I'm sure he regrets badly.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

my god. But you don't see as much whining about that online as you did the WAS goal that was waived off the other night.

I think there is though. There's a 20 page thread on the main board as a result of that call on top of all the comments in the Series thread. I've also seen it hotly discussed in the media as well.

 

[HisIceness]

I went to bed with Vegas up 3-0 and they lost. Wow.

 

[Identity404]

Vegas deserves to lose after giving up 4 goals on that major, that is a some epic level choking.

 

[Ole Gil]

Wow, that major was awful. The cross check to the chest just put Pavelski off balance. He might not have even fallen down if the second guy didn't bump him while he was trying to catch his balance.

 

[DougieSmash]

This kid is the real deal.

Series Talk: - WCQF/CDSF: (C2) Winnipeg Jets vs (C3) St Louis Blues | STL leads 1-0 Jets in 6.

Series Talk: - ECQF/MDSF: (M2) New York Islanders vs (M3) Pittsburgh Penguins | NYI leads 2-0 Pens in 5.

Series Talk: - WCQF/CDSF: (C1) Nashville Predators vs (WC1) Dallas Stars | Stars lead 3-2 Predators in 6.

Series Talk: - ECQF/MDSF: (M1) Washington Capitals vs (WC1) Carolina Hurricanes | WSH leads 2-1 Capitals in 4.

Series Talk: - WCQF/PDSF: (P1) Calgary Flames vs (WC2) Colorado Avalanche | Series Tied 1-1 Calgary in 7.

Series Talk: - ECQF/ADSF: (A1) Tampa Bay Lightning vs (WC2) Columbus Blue Jackets | CBJ leads 1-0 Tampa in 5.

Well, at least he got Sharks in 7.

 

[Socks]

The drought continues. Both the Canadian Cup and Leafs Cup drought.

Columbus vs Boston it is. Good luck @Socks !

Thanks!! And good luck to you guys! I have complete confidence that the Canes will have many more games this season (until we meet in the ECF that is ).

 

[Sens1Canes2]

I went to bed with Vegas up 3-0 and they lost. Wow.

I went to bed after the 2nd period. Sharks were doing nothing. Ooof.

 

[Dishface]

I went to bed after the 2nd period. Sharks were doing nothing. Ooof.

Went to bed when it was 3-0 in the third.... Should not have done that, missed a great comeback.

 

[WreckingCrew]

I'm torn on this, but I see both sides of it. I believe the rulebook says the ref can use discretion on a cross-checking to assess a major if there is injury (paraphrasing, so something like that) so while the cross-check itself, wasn't overly egregious (although it was pretty forceful and unnecessary in the sense that it wasn't made in an attempt to make a play), the result clearly was.

There was some question on the Foegele play on Oshie. That was touch and go in terms of a major and we were lucky that it wasn't, but I can see a bit of a distinction as to why it was called as it was, at least in my mind. Foegele was trying to make a play on Oshie who had the puck and first tried to lift his stick and gave him a little shove which turned out bad for Oshie. Point is, all of the action was done in an attempt to make a hockey play on a guy with the puck and wasn't a very forceful push at all.

In this SJ case, the puck was already gone back to the point when Eakins decided to cross-check Pavelski and then Stastny(?) made it worse by shoving an already off balance Pavelski to the ground. If Pavelski isn't injured, it's a 2 min. cross checking penalty. Right or wrong, the injury (along with the fact that the infraction wasn't made while trying to make a play on the puck or anything) turned it into a major so as I said, I can see both sides of it. Not sure if it was in retaliation to something else, but it seemed like a pretty unnecessary play by Eakins, which I'm sure he regrets badly.

You pretty well summed up my thoughts on the penalty. I'll say, for me personally, it's probably a 2 min penalty (unless you can say 4 min double-minor because of the injury?)...much like with the Foegele-Oshie incident, the injury was incredibly unfortunate but more the result of an awkward fall than directly due to the infraction. That said, it was a very hard cross-check, to the chest, not in the active play, AND turned into an inujry (maybe you call 2 for cross-checking, 2 for interference)...so it's not the most egregious thing ever.

That said, anyone whining that it cost them the game is a moron. Should it have been 2 instead of 5 min, probably...but if you let in 4 goals on a single 5 min PP that's on YOU, not the refs. You can maybe fault them and be angry with 1 goal, but not 4...that's just pitiful. They were literally 400% on that PP. I've seen plenty of 4 min, 5 min, and 5 on 3 PKs stifle the opposition, so that shouldn't be an excuse.

 

[RodTheBawd]

Should not have been a major, thats tough. At least the players are taking it well:

 

[Negan4Coach]

I think there is though. There's a 20 page thread on the main board as a result of that call on top of all the comments in the Series thread. I've also seen it hotly discussed in the media as well.

Oh, sure, on here there is always whining. I didnt see that reflected on sports websites like "Washington loses game 6 on questionable call" , instead it is "San Jose mounts greatest comeback in the history"

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I'm guessing he'll be fined for that, but it's good to hear a player speak his mind vs. the standard canned responses.

 

[HisIceness]

Should not have been a major, thats tough. At least the players are taking it well:

Now that's a good interview. Russell Westbrook could learn a thing or two from Marshy.

 

[A Star is Burns]

I'd be fine with a replay for majors or something. But even though it had a big impact, and it was a bad call in my mind, it didn't directly lose the game for them. You can kill the penalty/don't give up 4. They got it to OT and still blew it. You can not lose on a ****ty SH goal in OT in the previous game. You can not blow a 3-1 series lead. It sucks, but it's just one of many reasons they lost the series.

It's the same thing with the Saints. NO blew a huge lead, had chances to punch it into the end zone and settled for field goals, had poor play calling leading up to the missed call, let them drive down the field for a field goal to tie, got intercepted after having the ball in OT, let them move the ball enough to get the FG attempt to win. Obviously a play like that can have a huge impact, but you can't ignore all the other opportunities you had to put the game away earlier in my mind.

 

[TheBigKahuna]

Vegas was up 3-0 before getting assessed a weak major penalty. San Jose scored 4 on the 5 min powerplay.

They gave up 4 goals. Play defense for Petes sake.

 

[LostInaLostWorld]

They gave up 4 goals. Play defense for Petes sake.

In the immortal words of BP, "Make a f***king save!"

 

[Blueline Bomber]

In the immortal words of BP, "Make a f***king save!"

It's true though. Fleury was really shaken last night. For their 4th goal, his angle was pretty poor, just all kinds of net to shoot at.

And the 2nd (I believe), watching the replay, he was so small in net. Like, I get it, you're screened, but if you can't see the shot, don't hunker down like a nuclear strike is coming.

 

[Cardiac Jerks]

They gave up 4 goals. Play defense for Petes sake.

I agree completely. Call was still weak, though.