Jump to content

2014 Stanley Cup Playoffs thread


MadDog2020

Recommended Posts

I don't know what to think in terms of who would be the better matchup. Let's just hope LA and Gaborik get the Cup.

 

LA has scored a ton.

 

My feeling is the Rangers will need their top scorers to actually score and they haven't all playoff. It's hard to keep that going. They'll need more from Richards, Nash. We'll see. Let's hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SCF 2014 Schedule

 

Game 1 at L.A. - Wednesday, June 4 (8 pm)

Game 2 at L.A. - Saturday, June 7 (7pm)

Game 3 at N.Y. - Monday, June 9 (8 pm)

Game 4 at N.Y. - Wednesday, June 11 (8 pm)

Game 5 at L.A. - Friday, June 13 (8 pm)

Game 6 at N.Y. - Monday, June 16 (8 pm)

Game 7 at L.A. - Wednesday, June 18 (8 pm)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am curious to see the ratings of this final since these are both big market teams

 

LA is not a big ratings market for the NHL. So far the ratings coming from LA locally in the playoffs have not been good. For example, NBA games that include teams not even close to LA have done significantly larger ratings than Kings games in LA. I expect that to continue in the Cup Finals.

 

On the other hand, Chicago is a ratings juggernaut. Chi/NYR would be the NHL's dream matchup. The NY/LA matchup might have national intrigue though.

 

Just read that Kenny Albert will be calling Game 1 of the Finals as there has been a death in Doc's family.

Edited by devilsrule33
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Quick's stats are not up to par, but you all are missing the the fact that Quick has face more shots than anyone in the playoffs....Quick has faced almost 80 more shots than Lundquist.  Is it the team bailing Quick out?  Or maybe the Kings suck at defense.  Yes, SV% is a huge part of the argument, but its difficult for a goalie to maintain a high SV% when he faces a high volume of shots every night and Quick has made some amazing saves in the Chicago series, despite his shoddy SV%, one stop on the Hawks on a big chance very late in the 3rd. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Quick's stats are not up to par, but you all are missing the the fact that Quick has face more shots than anyone in the playoffs....Quick has faced almost 80 more shots than Lundquist.  Is it the team bailing Quick out?  Or maybe the Kings suck at defense.  Yes, SV% is a huge part of the argument, but its difficult for a goalie to maintain a high SV% when he faces a high volume of shots every night and Quick has made some amazing saves in the Chicago series, despite his shoddy SV%, one stop on the Hawks on a big chance very late in the 3rd. 

 

The Kings just went through the gauntlet of San Jose, Anaheim, Chicago. Not a shocker that they faced the most shots of those 4 Conference Finals teams since they played the most games against the toughest teams. It's really a non-story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Quick's stats are not up to par, but you all are missing the the fact that Quick has face more shots than anyone in the playoffs....Quick has faced almost 80 more shots than Lundquist. Is it the team bailing Quick out? Or maybe the Kings suck at defense. Yes, SV% is a huge part of the argument, but its difficult for a goalie to maintain a high SV% when he faces a high volume of shots every night and Quick has made some amazing saves in the Chicago series, despite his shoddy SV%, one stop on the Hawks on a big chance very late in the 3rd.

Or maybe LA has played more games than everyone else, thus more shots

Or maybe Quick has been below average for awhile and largely average in his career

Or maybe Quick is forced to make amazing saves because he is often out of position

LA has pretty much dragged Quick through the playoffs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Quick's stats are not up to par, but you all are missing the the fact that Quick has face more shots than anyone in the playoffs....Quick has faced almost 80 more shots than Lundquist. Is it the team bailing Quick out? Or maybe the Kings suck at defense. Yes, SV% is a huge part of the argument, but its difficult for a goalie to maintain a high SV% when he faces a high volume of shots every night and Quick has made some amazing saves in the Chicago series, despite his shoddy SV%, one stop on the Hawks on a big chance very late in the 3rd.

Quick's also played one more game and a bunch of OT's. The Rangers have had two short OT's in the entire playoffs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were a Kings fan, I'd just be over the moon. The prospect of playing the Rangers just seems too good to be true; they are without a doubt the easiest and weakest opponent LA will have faced this entire playoffs, without a doubt. I just hope they can cash in. Knowing the Rangers luck this year, a flu bug hits the team locker room or some ridiculous sh!t like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah what the fvck was up with that?

 

Guess they couldn't find any clear 1940 footage.  Slim pickins.  Also, the 1994 Cup apparently was more important than any Cup won before or after it.  There's a special '94 Cup somewhere made of pure gold that proves it I'm sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess they couldn't find any clear 1940 footage.  Slim pickins.  Also, the 1994 Cup apparently was more important than any Cup won before or after it.  There's a special '94 Cup somewhere made of pure gold that proves it I'm sure.

 

It's also filled with Messier's tears

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.