The Obligatory Ice Hockey Thread

[foursideking]

Yguy, you seem quite certain that all this patchwork that burke's been doing is going to turn the leafs into an unstoppable juggernaut. Truth be told though, patching an old/leaky boat is not the same as buying/building a new boat. Burke's decisions ever since he entered toronto have seemed to revolve around the phrase 'one team's junk is another team's treasure', and so far, it has hurt your team completely. The surprising part, is that you're supporting him when he does something, and then shrugging it off like 'ah, well, we can always get something new' when he fails horribly (ie: getting giguere). I mean c'mon, don't you feel bad for your team? They bring in burke hoping for change/a new start, and so far all he's done is traded away perfectly good picks/prospects for players that were on downward slides/failing horribly on their old teams. The entire point in being a fan is to support the team, not the person destroying it.

[obfuscator]

Yguy, you seem quite certain that all this patchwork that burke's been doing is going to turn the leafs into an unstoppable juggernaut. Truth be told though, patching an old/leaky boat is not the same as buying/building a new boat. Burke's decisions ever since he entered toronto have seemed to revolve around the phrase 'one team's junk is another team's treasure', and so far, it has hurt your team completely. The surprising part, is that you're supporting him when he does something, and then shrugging it off like 'ah, well, we can always get something new' when he fails horribly (ie: getting giguere). I mean c'mon, don't you feel bad for your team? They bring in burke hoping for change/a new start, and so far all he's done is traded away perfectly good picks/prospects for players that were on downward slides/failing horribly on their old teams. The entire point in being a fan is to support the team, not the person destroying it.

 

Tell me, when did I ever say that? Please, quote my post, right here. All I've said was that I think the team is getting better, and I enjoy watching them more than I have the past.

 

I also don't remember supporting the giguere trade, but he did manage to get rid of blake/toskala in it and I do think giguere has played better than toskala, though not well.

[Blyaunte]

You seem quite certain all three of boston's draft picks will turn out to be the next 3 versions of sidney crosby...

 

.. or a reasonably close facsimile thereto.

 

You're missing the point. I think you're doing it deliberately.

 

You also seem quite determined to mindlessly bash toronto fans at every opportunity, and the wendel clark comment proves it. A checker who had an 80 point season, a bad player? Are you out of your mind?

 

Leafs fans. :rolleyes: Honestly. Wendel Clark was a piece of [cabbage]. Always was. Always will be.

 

Please show me where he EVER scored 80 points in ONE NHL season -- let alone in more than one.

 

He took bad penalties - made terrible on-ice decisions which resulted in bad penalties and spent more time injured than playing.

 

Total crap!

 

Next you'll try to tell us that BB was an idiot for drafting the Sedins

 

Hello? Is this thing on? Aren't you paying attention?!?!? *tap tap*

 

Helloooooooo? McFly?

 

The Sedin's deal is PRECISELY the kind of move I am saying Burke SHOULD have made instead of picking up Kessel. He had a first round pick and a second round pick. He COULD have traded baggage to Boston for THEIR pick -- and got THREE good, if not great picks. But no, instead, he dumped valuable picks for trash.

[foursideking]

Wow, blyaunte, you just completely decimatedisincompetency, all the while summing up the other half of my arguement. Makes me wish toronto had actually made the playoffs, so he'd still have a leg to stand on.

[obfuscator]

 

 

.. or a reasonably close facsimile thereto.

 

You're missing the point. I think you're doing it deliberately.

 

No, I'm not missing the point at all. The truth is, you have NO WAY of knowing how those draft picks will pan out. Saying they'll be better than Kessel is nothing more than speculative idiocy.

 

Leafs fans. :rolleyes: Honestly. Wendel Clark was a piece of [cabbage]. Always was. Always will be.

 

Please show me where he EVER scored 80 points in ONE NHL season -- let alone in more than one.

 

He took bad penalties - made terrible on-ice decisions which resulted in bad penalties and spent more time injured than playing.

 

Total crap!

 

Ahh, yes. Wendel Clark, total crap.

 

Let's see. 1993-1994. 46 goals, 30 assists, 76 points, +10. In 64 games played. As a checking winger. Hmm, I wonder who has 46 goals this season in the nhl, after 75 games played. Let's see...how about no one?

 

Bad penalties? Fights? Injuries? Sure. That makes him imperfect, not bad.

[foursideking]

Weird yguy, you simultaneously proved your point and shattered your other 'leg that you could've stood on' all with the second half of that point. She said 'point out a time where wendel clark scored more than 80 in a season'. You gave her a season with 76 points. 76 is the new 80 now? I'll be back later as I have an appointment, until then, don't blow that other leg without me...

[All_Is_Great]

In 64 games played. Hello hi!

 

Wow please keep the leaf bashing off this board. Go back to TSN. Seriously.

 

This is honestly getting [developmentally delayed]ed. What's wrong with the leafs? Oh they haven't won a cup in 50 years. So? My Oilers and Minny haven't won a [bleep]ing game in 3 weeks.

 

Btw, Wendel Clark scored 330 NHL goals, how many have you scored Blyuante? 1? Please stop spewing nonsense ok? I get you're entitled to your own opinions but this is turning into a gongshow.

[obfuscator]

D/w a_i_g, I think they're just trolling.

[foursideking]

And thus a perfectly good discussion turns into immaturity and idiotism. Aig, you've seemingly confused us winning the arguement of whether the leafs need a rebuild/need new things with pointless flaming, which, is pretty bad. The leafs are indeed pretty horrible, and sure, many could say that they are always competitive, but I think we could all agree that they have no chance whatsoever of winning the cup in the next 3-4 years. Leafs discussion on my end-done. To answer the 2nd half of your immaturity: you don't need to do something to be able to rate it/argue about it. Me/blyaunte are here discussing/arguing things, because we have passion for the game, and because we're good at debating. Hockey skills therefore do not matter.

 

Calling us trolls, pretty sad. I'm pretty sure we won the debate over what the leafs need to do, let's move onto something else.

 

Oh, and I'd be up for starting that playoff pool idea I had, should anyone else be interested.

[obfuscator]

And thus a perfectly good discussion turns into immaturity and idiotism. Aig, you've seemingly confused us winning the arguement of whether the leafs need a rebuild/need new things with pointless flaming, which, is pretty bad. The leafs are indeed pretty horrible, and sure, many could say that they are always competitive, but I think we could all agree that they have no chance whatsoever of winning the cup in the next 3-4 years. Leafs discussion on my end-done. To answer the 2nd half of your immaturity: you don't need to do something to be able to rate it/argue about it. Me/blyaunte are here discussing/arguing things, because we have passion for the game, and because we're good at debating. Hockey skills therefore do not matter.

 

Calling us trolls, pretty sad. I'm pretty sure we won the debate over what the leafs need to do, let's move onto something else.

 

Oh, and I'd be up for starting that playoff pool idea I had, should anyone else be interested.

 

Perfectly good discussion? You ignore half my points and come back with so called "victory blows". For example, your only comeback to my post about clark was that 76 points is different then 80. I rounded up. It was in 64 games. But you completely ignore that.

 

Neither of you are any good at debating. All you're doing is spouting nonsense and ignoring every single good point we make because you're so set on bashing the leafs that you can't see two inches in front of your face.

 

The leafs are "pretty horrible"? Sorry, how would you classify every team in the national hockey league then (excepting NJ and NYI), because the leafs record since the all star break is better then all of them.

 

That's exactly the kind of uneducated, off the cuff comment that gives you no credibility in my eyes.

[foursideking]

She says 'name a season where he's scored more than 80', and you respond with one where he scored 76. Now, using your logic involving draft picks, one can assume that there would be the same odds of him scoring 0 as there are of him scoring 200 in the 18 games he missed. What we're doing is arguing facts that you clearly refuse to ignore: firstly, that teams which have gone through full-rebuilds have won cups/become dynasties, and secondly, that the leafs' 'patchwork team' is never going to turn them into a dynasty.

 

The leafs are actually pretty horrible, and if you actually paid attention to the first half of the season, then you'd understand why. Playing good for half the season shouldn't automatically mean that the other half gets discounted. If that were the case, then many top teams (namely pittsburgh) would be considered horrible.

 

Truth be told, we have credibility, and we are educated. You just refuse to see it for some reason.

[obfuscator]

She says 'name a season where he's scored more than 80', and you respond with one where he scored 76.

 

It's a semantic. I didn't know checking wingers needed to score more than 80 points to be good. Ridiculous.

 

Now, using your logic involving draft picks, one can assume that there would be the same odds of him scoring 0 as there are of him scoring 200 in the 18 games he missed.

 

Wait, what? This is so mind-bogglingly ridiculous that I don't know how to respond.

 

What we're doing is arguing facts that you clearly refuse to ignore: firstly, that teams which have gone through full-rebuilds have won cups/become dynasties, and secondly, that the leafs' 'patchwork team' is never going to turn them into a dynasty.

 

I never denied that teams that have gone through full rebuilds have become dynasties and won cups. What I'm saying is that there are plenty of teams who have also done full rebuilds who have never won a cup. You guys act like full rebuilds are a guarantee of a cup and dynasties. This is completely untrue.

 

The leafs are actually pretty horrible, and if you actually paid attention to the first half of the season, then you'd understand why. Playing good for half the season shouldn't automatically mean that the other half gets discounted. If that were the case, then many top teams (namely pittsburgh) would be considered horrible.

 

Truth be told, we have credibility, and we are educated. You just refuse to see it for some reason.

 

I never said it made the leafs a good team. I'm saying that they have at times played well - and that makes them less then horrible. They aren't good. They are not horrible.

 

Credibility and education? I see none of that here, and neither does everyone else reading this thread besides you and bly.

[foursideking]

Nearly every good/elite player past and present has had a season in which they have scored 80 or more. 80 seems to be the baseline for good/bad forwards in the nhl, with the hall of fame having many who have.

 

Your logic for draft picks was, iirc, 'a draft pick can either be good or bad, so we can't determine what will become of it'. Shift that line of logic towards your point on him scoring 76 in 64, and you can see that his scoring potential for those 18 games is unknown, so we have to take it as what it is, simply, just 76 in 64.

 

Only 5 of the 64 teams who did a full rebuild never won the cup in the past 70 years of hockey, so you can clearly see how doing a complete rebuild/making a dynasty is truly worth doing. I mean, after all, even if it fails you'll still tend to have a few good players, which is a few more than toronto currently has.

 

Lastly, all the good teams in the nhl are known for their consistancy. It doesn't take a genious to point out that winning 1 game and then losing 1 game for 82 will end up with a better consistancy than a team that loses 42 and then wins 40. The leafs need consistancy if they even want to be in playoff contention, and with their current setup, they really have no shot.

 

Now, can we all move on? This is a hockey thread, not a troll/cheap shotting thread.

[obfuscator]

Nearly every good/elite player past and present has had a season in which they have scored 80 or more. 80 seems to be the baseline for good/bad forwards in the nhl, with the hall of fame having many who have.

 

Yes, if we're talking about a scoring forward. Wendel clark was primarily a checker, so 46 goals/76 points in 64 games is superb.

 

Your logic for draft picks was, iirc, 'a draft pick can either be good or bad, so we can't determine what will become of it'. Shift that line of logic towards your point on him scoring 76 in 64, and you can see that his scoring potential for those 18 games is unknown, so we have to take it as what it is, simply, just 76 in 64.

 

That's untrue. 60% of draft picks don't make it as NHL players. That's a fact, proven by the drafts of the past 30 years. But my primary point was with clark's existing totals - 46 goals in 64 games is superb for a checking winger even if he never got another point.

 

Only 5 of the 64 teams who did a full rebuild never won the cup in the past 70 years of hockey, so you can clearly see how doing a complete rebuild/making a dynasty is truly worth doing. I mean, after all, even if it fails you'll still tend to have a few good players, which is a few more than toronto currently has.

 

 

Uhh yeah going to have to ask for a source on that.

 

Lastly, all the good teams in the nhl are known for their consistancy. It doesn't take a genious to point out that winning 1 game and then losing 1 game for 82 will end up with a better consistancy than a team that loses 42 and then wins 40. The leafs need consistancy if they even want to be in playoff contention, and with their current setup, they really have no shot.

 

Now, can we all move on? This is a hockey thread, not a troll/cheap shotting thread.

 

I never said they had a shot. I simply said they are not terrible. A team that is over 500 is not terrible. I agree, the leafs won't make the playoffs this year. I also agree, they have a ways to go before they can compete seriously. But they aren't terrible.

[All_Is_Great]

Sidney Crosby has 60 some odd points this season, is he a mediocre player?

[obfuscator]

Good win last night. Also nice to see Vancouver clinch the conference for the first time in their history :) Should win the presidents as well, most likely...

[fastortoise]

Good win last night. Also nice to see Vancouver clinch the conference for the first time in their history :) Should win the presidents as well, most likely...

Yeah they will.

Also, if the Habs beat the Canes tonight we're pretty much clinched :thumbsup: Huuuuge game for my city tonight ahhh! (and I will be missing it, gah)

[Blyaunte]

 

 

.. or a reasonably close facsimile thereto.

 

You're missing the point. I think you're doing it deliberately.

 

No, I'm not missing the point at all. The truth is, you have NO WAY of knowing how those draft picks will pan out. Saying they'll be better than Kessel is nothing more than speculative idiocy.

 

Leafs fans. :rolleyes: Honestly. Wendel Clark was a piece of [cabbage]. Always was. Always will be.

 

Please show me where he EVER scored 80 points in ONE NHL season -- let alone in more than one.

 

He took bad penalties - made terrible on-ice decisions which resulted in bad penalties and spent more time injured than playing.

 

Total crap!

 

Ahh, yes. Wendel Clark, total crap.

 

Let's see. 1993-1994. 46 goals, 30 assists, 76 points, +10. In 64 games played. As a checking winger. Hmm, I wonder who has 46 goals this season in the nhl, after 75 games played. Let's see...how about no one?

 

Bad penalties? Fights? Injuries? Sure. That makes him imperfect, not bad.

 

Trying to purport that Wendel Clark was some time of prolific goal-scoring checker, is like trying to say that Phil Kessel is an elite level hockey player who's production and team value will be better than ALLTHREE (3) top NHL draft picks from 2010/11 who will play for 2/3rds of his salary ...

 

Oh wait. :rolleyes:

 

:lol:

 

Seriously, I can't tell if you're just too biased, or you're just trolling the Leafs line in an effort to hide from the darker reality. You've already indicated that you really don't know much of the team's history that you purport to support.

 

Perhaps you should do some homework before you go off the handle spewing tall tales about someone's alleged "greatness" and team role.

 

When Wendel Clark earned 76 points (not 80) in 1993-94, he was on a line with Doug Gilmour and Dave Andreychuk. That was their scoring line. Wendel wasn't a "checker". Gilmour amassed 111 points that season and Andreychuk had 99, including 53 goals. Hell -- a shaved ape could have played with those two guys and earned 76 points.

 

Oh wait one did.

 

Nevermind.

 

Clark NEVER had that much production in his career before or after that season. Without Gilmour to get the play in motion, and Andreychuk to finish, Clark was nothing more than a shaved ape. With the exception of one season, Clark's annual seasonal output is more in line with any of the other shaved apes on the Leafs' roster of all-time great players like Nik Antropov ... :rolleyes:

 

No. Really. Look it up.

 

 

Now back on topic +/- 22 I fail to see how it is that you don't understand how bad the Kessel trade was for Toronto.

 

I am not saying that any ONE of the draft picks that Burke tossed off for Kessel will be better than Kessel.

 

I am saying that ALL THREE DRAFT PICKS will be better, ACTING TOGETHER (and perhaps separately) than Phil Kessel. Period. There is no way in hell that Phil Kessel will outmatch the COMBINED production of THREE PLAYERS. This is what Burke tossed away. This is what Leafs fans fail to comprehend. Any THREE PLAYERS are ALWAYS better than ONE player. Especially if that one player is Phil Kessel.

 

Thicky-thicky-thicky- thick-thick ...

 

Leafs fans. :rolleyes:

[Blyaunte]

Sidney Crosby has 60 some odd points this season, is he a mediocre player?

 

Only if you believe that, because a player once got 76 points in one year out of an 18-year career, it makes him an "all-time-great" NHL superstar.

 

If you believe that Nik Antropov is an elite level player, then yes, Sidney Crosby is a mediocre player.

 

Now stop trolling, STFU, and learn a thing or two about hockey before you commence spewing anymore bull[[cabbage]].

 

:rolleyes:

[foursideking]

I actually hope the habs make it past the first round....not because I'm a fan, but because plenty of hype was going around about them being the new sharks w/o halak.

 

Oh, and I agree blyaunte. Mind you, to quote a few of my 'homies' from fg, 'those who don't get it call you a troll, and those who get it but don't want to admit it call you a troll'. Even if wendel clark had played the last 18 games, it'd be unfair to assume that he would've scored points during that span. Since he didn't play, we have to take it as 76 points, that's it.

 

Anyways, I'm done arguing about the leafs. I've argued so much about their failures/misfortune that I think I'm now 1/16th leafs fan.

 

Oh, and if vancouver makes it past the 2nd round, then I'm pretty sure they have the cup locked up. Fans have been waiting years for them to play at the level they are now, only real threat out there is the sharks.

[obfuscator]

 

 

Trying to purport that Wendel Clark was some time of prolific goal-scoring checker, is like trying to say that Phil Kessel is an elite level hockey player who's production and team value will be better than ALLTHREE (3) top NHL draft picks from 2010/11 who will play for 2/3rds of his salary ...

 

Oh wait. :rolleyes:

 

:lol:

 

Ok, I'm going to use bold and all caps to help you actually read my post.

 

I AM NOT SAYING THAT WENDEL CLARK WAS SOME KIND OF PROLIFIC GOAL-SCORING CHECKER. Wendel clark was a checker, a good physical player with some offensive upside. Not every player on a team should be sidney crosby.

 

Phil Kessel is an elite level hockey player who's production COULD be better than all three draft picks. WE DO NOT KNOW YET.

 

Seriously, I can't tell if you're just too biased, or you're just trolling the Leafs line in an effort to hide from the darker reality. You've already indicated that you really don't know much of the team's history that you purport to support.

 

Perhaps you should do some homework before you go off the handle spewing tall tales about someone's alleged "greatness" and team role.

 

When Wendel Clark earned 76 points (not 80) in 1993-94, he was on a line with Doug Gilmour and Dave Andreychuk. That was their scoring line. Wendel wasn't a "checker". Gilmour amassed 111 points that season and Andreychuk had 99, including 53 goals. Hell -- a shaved ape could have played with those two guys and earned 76 points.

 

Oh wait – one did.

 

Nevermind.

 

Clark NEVER had that much production in his career – before or after that season. Without Gilmour to get the play in motion, and Andreychuk to finish, Clark was nothing more than a shaved ape. With the exception of one season, Clark's annual seasonal output is more in line with any of the other shaved apes on the Leafs' roster of all-time great players – like Nik Antropov ... :rolleyes:

 

No. Really. Look it up.

 

Yup, that was Clark's best season. Yup, because he played with great players. It doesn't change the fact that his job on the team was as a physical player with secondary scoring ability. And he did that very well.

 

 

Now – back on topic +/- 22 – I fail to see how it is that you don't understand how bad the Kessel trade was for Toronto.

 

I am not saying that any ONE of the draft picks that Burke tossed off for Kessel will be better than Kessel.

 

I am saying that ALL THREE DRAFT PICKS will be better, ACTING TOGETHER (and perhaps separately) than Phil Kessel. Period. There is no way in hell that Phil Kessel will outmatch the COMBINED production of THREE PLAYERS. This is what Burke tossed away. This is what Leafs fans fail to comprehend. Any THREE PLAYERS are ALWAYS better than ONE player. Especially if that one player is Phil Kessel.

 

Thicky-thicky-thicky- thick-thick ...

 

Leafs fans. :rolleyes:

 

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying YOU DON'T KNOW.

 

All three players are always better than one player? Ok. So it would be a great trade then, for pittsburgh to trade Crosby to toronto for lebda, komisarek, and rosehill, right? Because, according to your logic: "ANY THREE PLAYERS are ALWAYS better than ONE player".

 

Make a judgement on the trade once you actually know how those draft picks will pan out, not before.

 

@fsk: if chicago actually makes the playoffs i think they're a threat as well. Vancouver still has to exorcise those old demons, so to speak.

[foursideking]

I believe chicago lost the season series to vancouver though, which, going by traditional playoff math, gives them a 13.5% chance to win (per reg season win vs van).

 

Mind you, taking a look at the past 8 sc winners, you can see how the odds are stacked heavily against vancouver.

[obfuscator]

Well, we'll see.

 

You want to get a playoff pool started then? I think we've probably already got the east playoffs teams (only positions may change at this point) - and the west is basically locked except for 7th and 8th I think..

[foursideking]

Kk...we should probably post the east/west standings to make it easier for predictions. I already have my 'bets' in, just gotta find them.

[obfuscator]

Ok well here's what it looks like right now - realistically I think things will stay pretty much the same.

 

 

Do you want to pick the entire process? Or just first round? I'll do entire process right now, with number of games as well.

 

First

 

PHI vs. BUF -> Phi in 6

WSH vs. NYR -> WSH in 7

BOS vs. MTL -> BOS in 6

PIT vs. TB -> PIT in 7

 

VAN vs. CHI -> VAN in 7

DET vs. ANA -> DET in 7

SJS vs NSH -> NSH in 7

PHX vs. LAK -> LAK in 7

 

Second

 

PHI vs PIT -> PIT in 7

WSH vs BOS -> BOS in 7

 

VAN vs NSH -> VAN in 6

DET vs LAK -> DET in 7

 

Third

 

PIT vs. BOS -> BOS in 7

 

VAN vs DET -> VAN in 7

 

Final

 

VAN vs BOS - VAN in 6

 

Kind of guessed at the seeds...