Around the League XL: Games 7

[b1e9a8r5s]

I've been ragging on the PO format for years.

Right, but isn't bitching about the Leafs having to play Boston (or any other playoff format issue), not giving the Bruins the proper credit they deserve? Just like those people bitching about the call against Vegas instead of praising the Sharks for their comeback?

 

[JaegerDice]

I honestly don't have a problem with great teams meeting in the first round.

I'd hate it if I were an owner, because it would potentially cost me playoff gates I otherwise might have gotten with easier seeding, which is why I'm confused that the word coming from guys like Lebrun and Mckenzie is always 'the owners love the system, no desire or push for change'.

My issue with the current system is the repetition. Some people think it builds rivalries, but I don't buy it. Look at the Blackhawks for example. The two best rivalries the team had over the last 10 years were with Vancouver and LA. Both in another division. Meanwhile we met Minnesota three years in a row and STILL couldn't muster a hate-on for them. There are far more important ingredients to a rivalry than merely meeting in the playoffs a bunch.

I prefer variety in my year-to-year matchups, not penciling the same matchups in the playoffs every year. Good rivalries are organic, not manufactured.

 

[x Tame Impala]

My issue with the current system is the repetition. Some people think it builds rivalries, but I don't buy it. Look at the Blackhawks for example. The two best rivalries the team had over the last 10 years were with Vancouver and LA. Both in another division. Meanwhile we met Minnesota three years in a row and STILL couldn't muster a hate-on for them. There are far more important ingredients to a rivalry than merely meeting in the playoffs a bunch.

Fully agree. If the Hawks HAVE to get through STL and Colorado every year no matter what then it becomes less of a rivalry and more of something like a homework assignment.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Minnesota wasn’t a rivalry because we curb stomped them repeatedly. Vancouver was a rival because the teams genuinely seemed to dislike one another. I don’t think LA was really a “rivalry”.

 

[ClydeLee]

I dont line the complaints that the 1-8 leads to better teams or matchups in the conference final. In the hawks powerful postseason runs of the past seasons the best excitment matching rounds weren't the conference final. Yet this system actually delivered that

 

[JaegerDice]

Minnesota wasn’t a rivalry because we curb stomped them repeatedly. Vancouver was a rival because the teams genuinely seemed to dislike one another. I don’t think LA was really a “rivalry”.

Interesting. There wasn't a team I wanted to beat more than LA.

Cause I knew they were the only other team in the league with a legit claim to the best. They win 2 in 3 years, they overtake the Blackhawks (at the time) as the best of the cap era.

And they did it. And I HATED them for it (but respected them as a great team, obviously... it would have been different if they just gooned their way to a cup or something).

Ultimately we got the title back the next season, and kept it at least until the Penguins completed the back-to-back, so that kinda marked the end of the rivalry. But between 2012 and 2015, there wasn't a team I wanted the Blackhawks to prove themselves against more.

The historical stakes made those games so much more meaningful than something like 'oh, St Louis is kinda close and their players like to hit ours'. Like ok... and you have any chance of overshadowing or taking what away from my team exactly? When people look back on this era, they'll remember you why exactly? Even if St Louis wins this year... I'll start really wanting them to lose if they win 2 in 4 or something.

St Louis is just one example. You get the gist.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Interesting. There wasn't a team I wanted to beat more than LA.

Cause I knew they were the only other team in the league with a legit claim to the best. They win 2 in 3 years, they overtake the Blackhawks (at the time) as the best of the cap era.

And they did it. And I HATED them for it (but respected them as a great team, obviously... it would have been different if they just gooned their way to a cup or something).

Ultimately we got the title back the next season, and kept it at least until the Penguins completed the back-to-back, so that kinda marked the end of the rivalry. But between 2012 and 2015, there wasn't a team I wanted the Blackhawks to prove themselves against more.

The historical stakes made those games so much more meaningful than something like 'oh, St Louis is kinda close and their players like to hit ours'. Like ok... and you have any chance of overshadowing or taking what away from my team exactly? When people look back on this era, they'll remember you why exactly? Even if St Louis wins this year... I'll start really wanting them to lose if they win 2 in 4 or something.

St Louis is just one example. You get the gist.

I’ll take a playoff series win over the Blues over anything outside of the cup. f*** that team.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

I honestly don't have a problem with great teams meeting in the first round.

I'd hate it if I were an owner, because it would potentially cost me playoff gates I otherwise might have gotten with easier seeding, which is why I'm confused that the word coming from guys like Lebrun and Mckenzie is always 'the owners love the system, no desire or push for change'.

My issue with the current system is the repetition. Some people think it builds rivalries, but I don't buy it. Look at the Blackhawks for example. The two best rivalries the team had over the last 10 years were with Vancouver and LA. Both in another division. Meanwhile we met Minnesota three years in a row and STILL couldn't muster a hate-on for them. There are far more important ingredients to a rivalry than merely meeting in the playoffs a bunch.

I prefer variety in my year-to-year matchups, not penciling the same matchups in the playoffs every year. Good rivalries are organic, not manufactured.

As an owner, the format is just as likely to benefit you as it is hurt you. If the Leafs are getting a bad draw in terms of true seeding, that means someone else is getting a more favorable one then they deserve. It cuts both ways. Ultimately, as this playoffs have shown, there are no guarantees, regardless of the seeding. So I get why the owners don't find it to be an issue.

I don't know. The reason Van and LA were our biggest rivals was in part because we did play them multiple years in a short period of time in the playoffs. The reason Minnesota wasn't for us, is because the series were so one sided. But go ask Minnesota fans about the Hawks and I'm sure they hate us something fierce. I think to become rivals its two fold. You need to play each other often and you need to be roughly equal in quality. Throw in some dirty/rough stuff (Vancouver) and then you are really cooking.

The NHL is trying to force the issue with the divisional playoff format. I don't love it, but I don't hate it either. If you want to win the cup, you need to beat whoever you play. With this format, there's a bigger chance that an eventual cup winner's toughest opponent in an earlier round than if it was 1 v 8. But there's still always going to be that chance because of upsets or conferences. Short of going to 1 v 16, (not realistic because of travel) it's always going to be possible.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

The internet would have left smoking craters all over Ontario if they lost game 7 like the Knights did. What could have been.

 

[RayP]

The internet would have left smoking craters all over Ontario if they lost game 7 like the Knights did. What could have been.

Oh man I didn’t even think about that. I mean I’m still happy that Leafs lost, but that would have just been icing on the f***ing cake.

 

[Styles]

The internet would have left smoking craters all over Ontario if they lost game 7 like the Knights did. What could have been.

The boards would still be crashed.

 

[Hattrick Kane]

It takes two to tango in a rivalry. Toronto being beaten repeatedly by Boston is not a rivalry.

It’s more like a little brother desperately trying to beat the big brother and failing over and over.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

It takes two to tango in a rivalry. Toronto being beaten repeatedly by Boston is not a rivalry.

It’s more like a little brother desperately trying to beat the big brother and failing over and over.

There’s enough noise out of Toronto for Boston fans to love beating the Leafs

 

[AmericanDream]

It takes two to tango in a rivalry. Toronto being beaten repeatedly by Boston is not a rivalry.

It’s more like a little brother desperately trying to beat the big brother and failing over and over.

the series itself wasn't nearly as heated/physical as I expected overall. outside of Kadri and Debrusk, I honestly thought the overall volatility was lacking in what should have been such a heated rivalry. don't get me wrong, the games were good and there was physicality, but nothing like SJ and Vegas which looked like a freaking war zone the final 3 games..

 

[Giovi]

You clearly don't understand the magnitude of issues Kane had off ice and I am not just talking about the legal issues.

Keith has been suspended for 12 games and Kadri 18 games so they are 100% comparable. Both players were suspended for stupid dirty plays.

The other thing you don't seem to get is how big of an impact solid leadership in the room can have on a player.

I understand Kanes issues when he was younger....key being he wasnt 28. He was a kid.

I find it humorous you cite the strong locker room leaders as the key to changing Kadris behavior, and in the same post cite the fact one of said leaders has been suspended almost as much as Kadri.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[clydesdale line]

It takes two to tango in a rivalry. Toronto being beaten repeatedly by Boston is not a rivalry.

It’s more like a little brother desperately trying to beat the big brother and failing over and over.

Yup. Same honestly with us and Detroit. We were the little brother for years and they were the big brother. They pretty much always beat us till 2013. I obviously don't like Detroit, but respect the hell out of them (and the Kings). Can't say the same about the Blues (or Vancouver for that matter back then).

 

[IU Hawks fan]

3) One tv in an apartment with a live-in girlfriend, i'll let you do the math on that one

Get a tablet.

 

[BobbyJet]

The internet would have left smoking craters all over Ontario if they lost game 7 like the Knights did. What could have been.

No matter the fan base, there is reason to be upset.

Sure, VGN broke down and let in all those PP goals but it was from a 5-minute PP that should never have been.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

No matter the fan base, there is reason to be upset.

Sure, VGN broke down and let in all those PP goals but it was from a 5-minute PP that should never have been.

Sure, but Vegas and its fans aren’t gonna react full riot like Toronto would have.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Minnesota wasn’t a rivalry because we curb stomped them repeatedly. Vancouver was a rival because the teams genuinely seemed to dislike one another. I don’t think LA was really a “rivalry”.

Yeah, I view Nashville as a much bigger rivalry than LA ever was.

 

[Cowch]

Gonna be hard for this caps/canes to top, or even meet yesterday's games' drama

 

[Pez68]

I might be off here, but I really don't see any way Carolina wins this game.

 

[Pez68]

Oh my Ovi! Hamilton is going to have nightmares about Ovechkin for years.

 

[ndgt10]

Wilson is soooo good

 

[Pez68]

Wilson is soooo good

Lol, that's what you got out of that play? Wtf?