sheeps Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 NO BLOOD for OIL hey, at least we agree with something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheeps Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 yummy... lou's alcoholic kool-aid... they should serve it at the games, make all the fans season-ticket holding drones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vadvlfan Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Danton for a 6th round pick, just get the punk outta here. This has dragged on too long. Jeff Jilson has had a disappointing year thus far. Send down twice, & thye've struggled defensively. It would never be a Jilson/Danton straight up , but maybe another prospect. Haven't heard lately, but I saw Jokela play, & looked very good, as did Hartsburg. Hopefully they'll stay in Albany. Vince Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 GR: Hasan because someone doesn't agree with your opinion today, tomorrow or next week doesn't make them stupid or whiney. Where in my post did I say stupid? And heck, you and the others called us homers early in the season, when in fact we were realists then and are realists now. How is you calling us a homer different from people that call you whiny? And disagreeing with me personally doesn't make you whiny; I could care less if you disagree with me. It's not about personal disagreements it's about your own unrealistic standards. That's what makes you whiny. When the team doesn't win you whine, when the team doesn't win enough you whine, and when the team does win enough you say well that's fine but they better keep it up or I'll whine again. You seem to forget what happen to the Devils in the finals the year before the Canes, and that was a better Devils team than today. The Canes 2002 last season outperformed the Devils of 2001 in the finals. So putting down the Canes of last season shows up your lack of knowledge regarding hockey. Again, where in my post did I mention the 2001 Devils? But heck if you want to go there, the Devs beat basically the same Cane team that year in the first round and probably would have beaten them again last year if Gomer wasn't out and several other players (Sykora most notably) weren't nursing injuries. Just because a team has a nice month-and-a-half run doesn't make them a great team. Not when they had 91 points that year. Not when they've followed it up by going down the crapper this year. I don't want to say it was a fluke run but really what else can you call it at this point based on the evidence? Heck I thought they were gonna be okay this year, about as good as they were last year, which is to say a good, not great team. I wasn't saying they'll miss the playoffs or anything like that (redruM I know, for one did say they would miss the playoffs, and boy does he look like a prophet now ). My point is the Devils of the early season were comparable to the team that won the Conference last year. I was using it to illustrate a point that the competition in the East is not out of our league. If you want to dispute that well be my guest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nieuwy25 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 San Jose lost again tonight - to Phoenix! They are DONE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GetReal Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 Hasan I got this from someone else. If the Canes of last season were a fluke then the Devils of '95 were also a fluke since they sisn't make the playoffs in '96. You must agree. I would and will still call YOU a homer, Hasan, now that you brought it up. Hasan how do I have unrealistic standards when I posted the Devils were awful in the finals of 2001? After they won in 2000. And how am I unrealistic when I posted that they wouldn't get out of round 1 in 2002 and they didn't, they got beat by the Canes? Oh you, Hasan, say that was because they missed Gomez. BS, other teams have had injured players and still win. No it's your HOMER ATTITUDE, now that you brought it up, '95 Devils team sucked based on your point cause they went down the crapper in '96. YOU'RE wrong Hasan, again I guess your idea of good is based on play in regular season record. Mine is on the real season the playoffs. Mine opinions are based on the make up of the team, the consistency of the team during the regulur season, their offense and defense, and how I think they will do in the playoffs. If I am wrong with my opinion I will state so during of after the feat. You won't find me making excuses for them or if the cow jump..... like you, Hasan. Enough of this waste of time. Have a nice time with your fixed opinion, excuses and make believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 No, I don't have to agree.. the 93-94 Devils were the 2nd best team in hockey, and one goal away from the Cup finals, the 95 Devils won the Cup.. half the team didn't show for 96, and the team wasn't *that* great a team to cruise by. They had forgotten what got them to the Cup. The Devils had several injuries against the Canes. Good, hungry teams overcome that. The Devils weren't either last year and that's why they lost. But with a healthy Sykora, Elias (he was injured too), Nieuwendyk, Langenbrunner, Richer, and Gomez, you don't think the Devils would have done any better? What's done is done. But Has is right, the East is not out of our reach. It's just that Devils fans can't get over the late 90s when every year they had hope and every year it was extinguished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risky Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 The difference between the '95 Devils and the '02 Canes is that the '02 Canes got OWNED in the Stanley Cup Finals. I don't know what series you were watching, but it wasn't even a contest. The Devils were a dominant force all the way through the playoffs in '95. And they didn't exactly come out of no where after being one Stefan Matteau away from the Finals the year before. While people may not have taken them seriously, they did after they swept the heavy favorites from Detroit. Flukey things happened last year in the Eastern Conference playoff round. The Devils were plagued with illness, injury and what seemed to be a lack of heart (they beat themselves mentally), allowing the Canes to advance. Then, the hot Montreal managed to oust the Bruins, who were the top seed and probably should have come out of the East. All of a sudden, Philadelphia couldn't score a single goal... All these things put together created space for ANY team to come out of the East, and any team did. Carolina wasn't a much different team than the one we walked all over in '00 and '01, with the exception, I guess of O'Neil and Cole. This year, they are the same team. Heart got them far last year, but that's all I'll give them. They would not have beaten Colorado, Detroit, Vancouver or even St. Louis last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Agreed, Risky. The Canes got really lucky in that the Senators, Flyers, and Bruins were ousted early.. all they had to do was beat two injury plagued squads and one playing way over its head to get there. You forget however that the Canes were about 2 minutes from making it a 2-2 Cup Final.. if Hull doesn't score that goal in Game 4 to send it to overtime, might've been a different series, but the Canes would've had to have gotten lucky for another game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 GR: Hasan I got this from someone else. If the Canes of last season were a fluke then the Devils of '95 were also a fluke since they sisn't make the playoffs in '96. You must agree. Sigh...this is like arguing with the Ranger/Flyer fans with the "Half a Cup" nonsense. I'll tell you what I've always told them. 1994 validated 1995. The fact that the Devs made a deep run in the playoffs the year BEFORE the Cup win suggested that the Cup win wasn't a total fluke. The playoff miss was the fluke in this case, especially with the team's history since then. If the Canes had validated what they did last year with another deep run (or if they had had a deep run the year before) then missed the playoffs I would say that was the fluke. See the difference now? I guess not. Funny how you kiss the Canes' butt for one nice playoff run and yet Lou is garbage after winning two Cups and 3 ECC's. Hasan how do I have unrealistic standards when I posted the Devils were awful in the finals of 2001? After they won in 2000. And how am I unrealistic when I posted that they wouldn't get out of round 1 in 2002 and they didn't, they got beat by the Canes? The difference between you and me is I rip the team only when it's deserved; like the 2001 playoffs, like the first half of last year. I rip the team when there's a clear lack of effort. I'd rip the management if I thought there was a clear lack of direction and I have gotten on Lou for a few of his recent moves (and I've been wrong myself on some of them - I thought Lou panicked trading Arnott for Niewy and Langer but it's worked out pretty doggone well except for Niewy's lack of goalscoring); but in general he's sure smelling like a rose (again) this year isn't he? He sacrificed talent for chemistry and so far it's worked big-time. Oh you, Hasan, say that was because they missed Gomez. BS, other teams have had injured players and still win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dog Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 In spite of all the back and forth, you really cannot compare teams from year to year. Even with minimal changes in personnel there are always factors to consider. The drive to win sometimes cannot be recaptured in consecutive years. Its fun to do, and fans will always try and do comparison with teams from other years, but in reality it really means nothing. One player added or subtracted can change the chemistry and mean the difference between winning and losing. In 2000, Scott Stevens was the difference in the Devils getting out of the first round. If he doesn't score those goals in games one and two and Floriday scores first it could have been different. If not for Claude in 1995 we might not have beaten Philly. The thing about this years team is that I believe the defense is playing better then any in the past three to four years. More importantly, Marty is playing his best hockey in two years. That alone could carry any team through the first round. What the Devils can establish offensively over the next four to six weeks will ultimately determine how well they do in the playoffs(Injuries aside). I just remember that in 2000 the team was in complete turmoil and most if not all the so called experts had them gone in the first round and headed for a complete dismantling. Well we grabbed the fourth spot by the skin of our asses and the rest is history. Some may always see the Devils glass as either half full or half empty. I prefer to see it as half full with the tap running. Go Devils!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamode Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Well put, Dog. Yes Marty is playing very well this year. Let's hope he doesn't tire out, though. I think anything is possible when this team has their heads on straight. Go Devils! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
point Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Dog is right, comparing one year's team to another is just senseless. Was that the same Patrick Roy who rolled over against the Wings last year the guy who looked like a magician the year before? Go figure. That, my friends, is why they actually play the games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GetReal Posted January 22, 2003 Author Share Posted January 22, 2003 Hasan you are very confusing to have a discussion with. Why, because you show two faces or state you show two faces. One the homer and the other a poster that will post negatives about the Devils when you think they deserve them which is rare. However if someone else does the same, but posting negatives most of the time, then they are whiney in your opinion. Is that a double standard? Hasen here is my question to you, and please consider the answer carefully. Can a girl be "only a little bit pregnant?" I ask you this Hasen, because that is what you are suggesting about yourself "only a little bit pregnant" and you say I am "pregnant." I am sure you get my point. Hasen, there is no such thing as a "fluke team" in sports. You say the Canes were a fluke. But the Devils weren't ever, unless the "fluke" was the missing of the '96 playoffs. Please Hasen, give me a break. You justify the "half cup" statement by the lose to the Rangers in '94 playoffs as justification that the Devils were for real in the half season '95 Cup victory. Hasen, what do you say about '96, '97, '98, & '99 Devils seasons when the Devils couldn't get out of round 1, round 2 in one case, not at all in another? Isn't that consistency. So by your standards the '00 Cup team was a fluke. Don't you agree? Please don't be inconsistent. Hasen was the '93 KINGS a fluke because they didn't make the playoffs in '94? My point is the Canes weren't a fluke, they beat the Devils in '02 playoffs round 1 and went on to the finals. But you, Hasan, are having trouble accepting that and must make excuses for the Devils!!!!!!! Why? There are always excuse why some team didn't win or why a team won. If one needs to make or have excuses like yourself, they are there. These teams aren't flukes, Hasan. I am glad you are a homer (not an insult) about the Devils. Please accept that not everyone shares your excuses or your loyality to the Devils regardless of any excuses. Hasen Just remember your "Flukes" the Canes, Kings and the Devils in '00. Let's agree to end this subject. I bet you can't, Hasan. Have a nice day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamode Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 Enough of this waste of time. Thought you already ended this, GR? Let me put my two cents in and say fight nicely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GetReal Posted January 22, 2003 Author Share Posted January 22, 2003 Zamode, that comment was in reference to that individual post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamode Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 Sense of humor, GR! Besides, this is a public forum! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 Right GR, Devils a fluke in 2000.. that's why in 2001, having lost their 4th best defenseman and a good right winger, made it to the Cup Finals. The Hurricanes were a fluke. They played two injured teams and one playing over its head. Even in those conditions, they still lost 2 games a series. They had key goals scored by Niclas Wallin. They were the first team to use two goalies in a playoff year in who knows how long. They're not going to make it back to the playoffs this year, they were a FLUKE. They catch Ottawa, or a healthy Toronto team in the Semis and they're done. The Devils in 2001 also played similarly flawed teams, however they also won the Cup the previous year. They were not a fluke, and one win away from being a dynasty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamode Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 I thought the 2001 team was better than the Cup team. Damn shame! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risky Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 Does anyone else wish to Lou almighty that GR would proofread his posts? I think you've been beaten here, GR. You're way up the 'Canes ass for getting knocked out in 5 games, but you won't give the Devils any credit. You sling around the word "homer" when you yourself should be called a "visitorer" as you seem to hold lovefests for every other club that's doing well except for ours. Your opinions are just as biased as the rest of ours -- except 180 degrees different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackjack Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 Hasen here is my question to you, and please consider the answer carefully. Can a girl be "only a little bit pregnant?"WHERE DID THAT COME FROM??!! I ask you this Hasen, because that is what you are suggesting about yourself "only a little bit pregnant" and you say I am "pregnant." I am sure you get my point. OHHH, ok, that cleared it up. Hasen, there is no such thing as a "fluke team" in sports. Never, in the history of sports, has a team benefitted from a couple lucky breaks and overachieved. I thought that was common knowledge. In fact, every team in the Eastern Conference would have gotten waxed by a bunch of exhausted 40 year olds in the SCFs, Carolina gave the best possible showing of any Eastern Conference team. You say the Canes were a fluke. But the Devils weren't ever, unless the "fluke" was the missing of the '96 playoffs. Please Hasen, give me a break. You justify the "half cup" statement by the lose to the Rangers in '94 playoffs as justification that the Devils were for real in the half season '95 Cup victory. Hasen, what do you say about '96, '97, '98, & '99 Devils seasons when the Devils couldn't get out of round 1, round 2 in one case, not at all in another? Isn't that consistency. So by your standards the '00 Cup team was a fluke. Don't you agree? Please don't be inconsistent. Hasen was the '93 KINGS a fluke because they didn't make the playoffs in '94? Yes, but in 1995...oh nevermind... My point is the Canes weren't a fluke, they beat the Devils in '02 playoffs round 1 and went on to the finals. But you, Hasan, are having trouble accepting that and must make excuses for the Devils!!!!!!! Why? and the inhumane manner in which the 'Canes were beaten around the rink by a bunch of senior citizens only lends further credence to the idea that The Hurricanes are not a fluke, but a DYNASTY!!! There are always excuse why some team didn't win or why a team won. If one needs to make or have excuses like yourself, they are there. Please accept that not everyone shares your excuses or your loyality to the Devils regardless of any excuses. WHAT'S YOUR EXCUSE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 GR I was gonna respond to that ridiculous tripe, but after stopping myself from laughing at it, I'm just gonna let you get the last word in since your last post was so ridiculous even for you I'll let THAT stand as the last word in this debate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 Sir, excuse for what, sir? I'm askin the f'in questions around here, not you, scumbag. Hahaha, very funny post BlackJack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dog Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 If I'm not mistaken the NHL doesn't take away awards or put disclaimers on awards for flukes. The Devils were the Stanley Cup Camps in 1995 and 2000. They were the Eastern Conference Champions in 2001. The Hurricanes are the defending Eastern Conference Champions for 2002. Those are all facts. They really should not be considered flukes. The players for both teams worked their asses off to obtain those titles. Why don't we all do them a favor and just congratulate them on their achievements and move on. Frankly I wouldn't mind the Devils having one or two more "fluke years" like 95' and 2000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.