This time it will be different

[cirov19 1]

6']

He started things with his deleted topic of "losing respect for zetterberg" based on Z's play of "puck cover-ups". He wanted [/b]attention and got it. When he posted this topic first last friday, people took this topic seriously saying "solid post". If anything he is an embarrassment to pens fans.

Absolutely this series is far from over. But its hard not to look at this and beg the question after 2 games "whatz different from last year". We are still up 2-0 heading to Pittsburgh and the pens still have no answer for detroit's d. Pens have to hold serve in the next two games or it appears likely that the wings will defend their cup again.

Didn't know that Tim! How about "losing respect for Crosby" for hacking at Maltby after a loss, or Malkin for trying to send a message ... after a loss.

Pens are embarrassing.

Sorry for not knowing the full story.

[tdinc 45]

A respectable post..... but the outcome will be the same if not more destructive.

GO WINGS!

[HadThomasVokounOnFortSt 878]

This one will be different...

Wings win 4-1 instead of 3-1.

Just kidding, this game will be different. Penguins will come out looking for some goals.

[AtomicPunk 296]

Sometimes it is better to be lucky than good.

Truth is that the Wings are up 2-0. And if they are holding the cup, no one will remember how lucky they were, only that they won, and the other team lost.

[BewareThePenguin 1]

So guys... different enough for you this time?

Just wondering.

[Zack is Great 14]

So guys... different enough for you this time?

Just wondering.

We'll be fine.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

So guys... different enough for you this time?

Just wondering.

The series score for the first time is different than last year, but we're nowhere near the Cup being awarded to either team. Don't be so quick to be cocky....the Wings could win it in the same amount of games as last year, again in your barn.

Sidenote: Stop baiting, the leash is short.

[BewareThePenguin 1]

The series score for the first time is different than last year, but we're nowhere near the Cup being awarded to either team. Don't be so quick to be cocky....the Wings could win it in the same amount of games as last year, again in your barn.

Sidenote: Stop baiting, the leash is short.

Whoa! Did I notch the Cup for Pens here? Did I say anywhere the Wings are done? Amazing what you read into things.

I'm merely commenting of the quality of the series so far. Not to mention how some posters rode me for even claiming the Pens would have a shot.

That is all.

[OsGOD 3]

the road to the out come is different but wings in 6 taking the cup from podium in front of a sea of white is still going to be the same!

[Frozen-Man 144]

The series score for the first time is different than last year, but we're nowhere near the Cup being awarded to either team. Don't be so quick to be cocky....the Wings could win it in the same amount of games as last year, again in your barn.

QFT - still a long way to go.

Sidenote: Stop baiting, the leash is short.

:clap: Thank you!

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Whoa! Did I notch the Cup for Pens here? Did I say anywhere the Wings are done? Amazing what you read into things.

I'm merely commenting of the quality of the series so far. Not to mention how some posters rode me for even claiming the Pens would have a shot.

That is all.

I never said you notched the Cup for the Pens. I simply said there's a lot of hockey left to be played. Funny how quickly you assume I was insinuating that you were giving the series win to Pittsburgh.

Don't pretend like your comment was innocent. You know exactly the type of responses you were looking to (or would likely) get with that comment on a Wings forum.

I'm telling you nicely to knock it off. The next warning will not be nice (for you atleast).

[BewareThePenguin 1]

I never said you notched the Cup for the Pens. I simply said there's a lot of hockey left to be played. Funny how quickly you assume I was insinuating that you were giving the series win to Pittsburgh.

Don't pretend like your comment was innocent. You know exactly the type of responses you were looking to (or would likely) get with that comment on a Wings forum.

I'm telling you nicely to knock it off. The next warning will not be nice (for you atleast).

Noted -- but please allow me to present my side of things. Here's what you said:

Don't be so quick to be cocky....the Wings could win it in the same amount of games as last year, again in your barn.

"Cocky"? That seems to imply at least that I was being smug about the Pens winning from here. That's hardly how I feel. Again, I'm merely only referring to the concept of my original post, where I said it wouldn't be such a walkover for Detroit as it was last year. That the series itself would be different -- not necessarily the outcome.

Apologies if I didn't communicate that clearly enough.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Noted -- but please allow me to present my side of things. Here's what you said:

No one ever said you couldn't. Just stop baiting.

"Cocky"? That seems to imply at least that I was being smug about the Pens winning from here. That's hardly how I feel. Again, I'm merely only referring to the concept of my original post, where I said it wouldn't be such a walkover for Detroit as it was last year. That the series itself would be different -- not necessarily the outcome.

Apologies if I didn't communicate that clearly enough.

That, you didn't. I have no problem with you discussing the fact that the series would look different from last years (it certainly has), but your post was short and seemed to be cocky given the Wings loss last night. That's what I'm referring to when I talk about baiting.

[BewareThePenguin 1]

(it certainly has), your post was short and seemed to be cocky given the Wings loss last night.

Well I certainly couldn't have made the post in the first place if the Wings had won, don't you think?

That was more about logic than arrogance.

Thanks for understanding.

[Frozen-Man 144]

Whoa! Did I notch the Cup for Pens here? Did I say anywhere the Wings are done? Amazing what you read into things.

I'm merely commenting of the quality of the series so far. Not to mention how some posters rode me for even claiming the Pens would have a shot.

That is all.

Most posters didn't ride you because of your initial post claiming that the Pens would have a shot. In fact most posters complimented you on the quality of the post. Where you started gettting ragged on was after the 2 Detroit wins when you gave the Wings no credit (even though as a precursor to your excuses you acted like you did), you claimed that the Wings had all the luck and that the Pens got only bad luck (and that the refs had not been fair to the Pens). That is why you got ragged on, and not supprisingly I haven't seen one post where you attributed the Pens two wins to the Pens getting lucky and the Wings having bad luck. That is why you annoyed so many people and they commented on it - the Wings win and it is just because they were lucky and the Pens had bad luck and the refs helped the Wings however when the Pens win it was not good luck for them and bad luck for the Wings but the superior skill of the Pens.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Well I certainly couldn't have made the post in the first place if the Wings had won, don't you think?

That was more about logic than arrogance.

Thanks for understanding.

That has nothing to do with it. The fact of the matter is that the Wings lost, the series is now square and you post a short reply to your own thread that you knew would come off as baiting. You know full well your post wasn't about logic.

[BewareThePenguin 1]

Most posters didn't ride you because of your initial post claiming that the Pens would have a shot. In fact most posters complimented you on the quality of the post. Where you started gettting ragged on was after the 2 Detroit wins when you gave the Wings no credit (even though as a precursor to your excuses you acted like you did), you claimed that the Wings had all the luck and that the Pens got only bad luck (and that the refs had not been fair to the Pens). That is why you got ragged on, and not supprisingly I haven't seen one post where you attributed the Pens two wins to the Pens getting lucky and the Wings having bad luck.

Here is a post of mine from a few days ago:

The Pens won tonight for the same reasons Detroit did the other night -- starting with working to win face-offs. Conspiracy talk like this cheapens the discussion for us all.

Does that sound like I've given the Wings no credit? Or given the Pens all of it? Heck, sounds pretty balanced to me.

You can go through each and every post I've put up here, and you won't find one instance of me claiming either Detroit won because of luck and/or calls, or that the Pens lost for the same reasons. When I DID point out some instances of luck and non-calls going Detroit's way, it was merely to say that these things went both ways. Particularly in regards to some alleged "conspiracy" by the league commissioner to fix the series for the Pens. Now THAT I have a major problem with.

Feel free to go through my post history, you'll find similar credit to Detroit for their wins.

Edited June 5, 2009 by BewareThePenguin

[timothy1997 0]

we will find out in the next week if this series outcome is different than last year. The jury is still out on this one.

[timothy1997 0]

You can go through each and every post I've put up here, and you won't find one instance of me claiming either Detroit won because of luck and/or calls, or that the Pens lost for the same reasons. When I DID point out some instances of luck and non-calls going Detroit's way, it was merely to say that these things went both ways. Particularly in regards to some alleged "conspiracy" by the league commissioner to fix the series for the Pens. Now THAT I have a major problem with.

Feel free to go through my post history, you'll find similar credit to Detroit for their wins.

Luck is when "prepardness meets opportunity". Detroit plays well at the Joe and it showed in games 1-2. Pittsburgh held serve at their home and hence they won 3-4.

The pens still have to win at the joe in order to win the cup which means that Pittsburgh has to overcome the matchup disadvantage as well as a hostile joe louis arena. Wings don't have to win at the Igloo.

[Snazzy 0]

Hey guys, this time will be different.

K?, good.

With that said, I think the series was different before it started. I mean, how can you replicate play-for-play in hockey? I don't think it's possible, do you?

[BewareThePenguin 1]

Luck is when "prepardness meets opportunity". Detroit plays well at the Joe and it showed in games 1-2. Pittsburgh held serve at their home and hence they won 3-4.

The pens still have to win at the joe in order to win the cup which means that Pittsburgh has to overcome the matchup disadvantage as well as a hostile joe louis arena. Wings don't have to win at the Igloo.

No question that's a big advantage for your team.

I'm heartened that the games in Detroit have been at least as competitive as the ones in Pittsburgh. I'm hoping Crosby finally getting off the schneid will finally open up the gates for him. Malkin's been a bull, but the Pens need Sid as well.

My gut feeling is that the winner of the next one takes the series.

Letang and Fedotenko have been mosquitoes biting at the Wings all series -- looking for one of them to hit something Saturday.

Fleury's outplayed Osgood the last two. I'm not sure how long that can last.

[timothy1997 0]

No question that's a big advantage for your team.

I'm heartened that the games in Detroit have been at least as competitive as the ones in Pittsburgh. I'm hoping Crosby finally getting off the schneid will finally open up the gates for him. Malkin's been a bull, but the Pens need Sid as well.

My gut feeling is that the winner of the next one takes the series.

Letang and Fedotenko have been mosquitoes biting at the Wings all series -- looking for one of them to hit something Saturday.

Fleury's outplayed Osgood the last two. I'm not sure how long that can last.

don't devalue what getting Datsyuk back for us means. He might just be the biggest difference in the series going forward.

[Frozen-Man 144]

Does that sound like I've given the Wings no credit? Or given the Pens all of it? Heck, sounds pretty balanced to me.

You can go through each and every post I've put up here, and you won't find one instance of me claiming either Detroit won because of luck and/or calls, or that the Pens lost for the same reasons.

Feel free to go through my post history, you'll find similar credit to Detroit for their wins.

Well it did take some searching, I mean I could hardly find anything but here you go:

Osgood was beaten on those and out of position. In this case an orange traffic cone in front of the net would've provided the same defense. Only luck prevented those from going into the net.

No, what I said was, Applesauce was lucky in that the puck flew out of the air right to him -- regardless of the skill shown in controlling it down to the ice. Likewise, Staal just happened to have his back turned to him, or he blocks the shot. Likewise, Fleury had no idea where the puck was, kind of like what happened to Ward in the last series.

A lot of things had to go right for Detroit on that play.

And again, you seriously gonna tell me his shot last night was a routine save that should've been made?

C'mon.

His goal last night was no different than Saturday's -- the puck flew right to him somehow and he was able to control it down to the ice and shoot. That's as much luck as skill. But that's not even the main point. Are you seriously going to tell me the blind shot he put up should've been anything but a routine save? C'mon now.

Again -- this time the Wings needed some breaks to win.

If we look at the game yesterday for example, Detroit had one goal due to a Pens' players broken stick (after a successful power play kill) and one see-what-sticks toss up from a mile away that Fleury goofed miserably on. Would you argue with that at all? Meanwhile, the Pens hit the post 3 or 4 times, somehow Crosby's shot missed sliding inside the line AND ricocheting off Osgood from behind in the most incredible non-score I've seen in years. (What are the odds of that?)

I'd say it was more about breaks, than style.

if not for a matter of half-inches, the Pens could've put up 4 or 5 goals last night. Woulda coulda or not -- that doesn't change the fact the game had a chance to go either way. See my point?

I covered this too already. Osgood's been lucky a lot the first two games.

Did they not hit the post about 8 times the last two games, unlike last year when they couldn't buy a scoring chance? Would you not at least concede the Pens could've won either game, had they caught a couple breaks or bounces?

Round 4 - Game 3: Terrible non-call on the pick that Detroit set on the PP goal. Announcers talked about it for a good 30 seconds. Unlike the Pittsburgh non-call, Detroit's actually led to an undeserved goal.

I know not much there, I mean I guess technically you are correct I couldn't find "find one instance of me claiming either Detroit won because of luck and/or calls, or that the Pens lost for the same reasons." I couldn't find ONE but maybe if you had reworded it, I couldn't hardly find one where you didn't. Maybe that is what you meant.

P.S. The forum wouldn't even allow me to post all of the quotes because there were too many so I will have to post the rest in a subsequent post.

[Frozen-Man 144]

And here are some more that wouldn't fit because there were too many for the size requirements of a post:

Maybe you should add "luck" to the list along with your other two theories.

I'm as curious as you guys to see how this goes tonight. Mainly to see Malkin and Crosby get to play when they're not so obstructed.

"Whipped a hot young goalie"? Yeah who played for COLUMBUS, the LOWEST SEED in the WHOLE PLAYOFFS.

Nice touch pumping up Chicago too. Yeah, they're the second coming of the '80 Islanders. Whoo!

The Wings have gotten away with a ton of subtle interference and obstruction. Before you go throwing hissy fits, don't take my word for it. Listen to the announcers from Sunday Night's game, or do a little look-see at some other fans (besides the Pens) sites, where they're saying the same thing. People have noticed.

Would you not agree that 2 of Detroit's goals last night were rather soft, and due more to poor goalie play than anything the Wings player did? Again, you tell me.

Wouldn't you agree at least a little that the Wings have had all the luck both games, and they could've gone either way? I could understand this comment last year, when Detroit just plain outskated the Pens. But c'mon... how many times did the Pens hit the post last night?

If not for breaks, the Pens could be up 2-0 right now.

[BewareThePenguin 1]

Well it did take some searching, I mean I could hardly find anything but here you go:

Couldn't find that "Wings only won because of luck they didn't deserve to" one you were hoping for huh?

I've said all along the Wings have caught some breaks -- which they did. One thing you didn't mention, a lot of these were in REPLY or in the context of fans here who were claiming ONLY the Pens got breaks and non-calls. I mentioned these in many cases as a balance to their one-sidedness claims. Fact is, both sides have caught some breaks. But I never denied that in the first place.

Thanks for looking though.

I know not much there, I mean I guess technically you are correct I couldn't find "find one instance of me claiming either Detroit won because of luck and/or calls, or that the Pens lost for the same reasons." I couldn't find ONE but maybe if you had reworded it, I couldn't hardly find one where you didn't. Maybe that is what you meant.

P.S. The forum wouldn't even allow me to post all of the quotes because there were too many so I will have to post the rest in a subsequent post.