MadMan Mark 0 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...ings/index.html I just don't get the continued love affair with the Pens. . . the writer, Allan Muir, lists them as #1 and then talks about their deficiencies. Sharks at #2 is a laugher now that they are over the cap with a no-name backup and a total of 19 players signed. I find it hard to understand how a team that dumped in the first round (again) and didn't address their problems is ranked higher than the defending Western Conf champs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 They won the Stanley Cup, kept their core and are a young team. Who should be ahead of them? As for the Sharks, your guess is as good as mine. That one's ridiculous. Sidenote: Allan Muir is an idiot. He's also from or writes for San Jose, IIRC. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MadMan Mark 0 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 They won the Stanley Cup, kept their core and are a young team. Who should be ahead of them? As for the Sharks, your guess is as good as mine. That one's ridiculous. I was thinking the Bruins, not many changes to a team that will be hungrier and more balanced between offense and defense, unlike the Pens who are offense heavy and holes in the D with Scuderi and Hal "Interference" Gill gone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MadMan Mark 0 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 They won the Stanley Cup, kept their core and are a young team. Who should be ahead of them? As for the Sharks, your guess is as good as mine. That one's ridiculous. Sidenote: Allan Muir is an idiot. He's also from SJ, IIRC. Thanks, that clears up the SJ at #2 garbage. . . just another Shark fan trying to erase last year and insert them into the WCF for the upcoming year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 I was thinking the Bruins, not many changes to a team that will be hungrier and more balanced between offense and defense, unlike the Pens who are offense heavy and holes in the D with Scuderi and Hal "Interference" Gill gone. It's still tough to rank them ahead of the Penguins in a Pre-training camp Power Ranking given that Pittsburgh's departures aren't too terrible compared to a solid portion of SC winners in the past. Kessel's new deal is either gonna hurt the Bruins via depth moves or he'll be gone due to cap space. Thanks, that clears up the SJ at #2 garbage. . . just another Shark fan trying to erase last year and insert them into the WCF for the upcoming year. Exactly. They'll be fine during the regular season, but the jury's still out on whether or not that core will ever be able to get it done when it counts. I truly thought the defensive additions (along with their post-season experience) plus Mclellan were going to be enough to push that team to atleast the WCF's, but they reverted right back to their former type of game when the going got tough against Anaheim. McLellan must have been frustrated as hell after how he had them playing pre-playoffs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 I lol'ed. Traditionally one puts the Cup winners at #1 and the Cup losers at #2, but why not throw a 2nd round loser in there instead. Honestly, how do hockey writers manage to put any faith in the 2nd round Sharks? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 Sidenote: Allan Muir is an idiot. He's also from or writes for San Jose, IIRC. Oh yeah, good point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heroes of Hockeytown 694 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 2nd round loser You put too much faith in them, Drake. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 I lol'ed. Traditionally one puts the Cup winners at #1 and the Cup losers at #2, but why not throw a 2nd round loser in there instead. Honestly, how do hockey writers manage to put any faith in the 2nd round Sharks? Heroes of Hockeytown beat me to it. Drake: FYI, they were 1st round losers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doc Holiday 0 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 I lol'ed. Traditionally one puts the Cup winners at #1 and the Cup losers at #2, but why not throw a 2nd round loser in there instead. Honestly, how do hockey writers manage to put any faith in the 2nd round Sharks? Silly Red Wings homer. The Sharks are 1st round losers now. Wait four years and they will be non-playoff teams despite being cup contenders every year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 You put too much faith in them, Drake. Good point-- they don't even have a full roster and they're up against the cap Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chrisdetroit 189 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 They won the Stanley Cup, kept their core and are a young team. Who should be ahead of them? As for the Sharks, your guess is as good as mine. That one's ridiculous. Sidenote: Allan Muir is an idiot. He's also from or writes for San Jose, IIRC. That's a stupid analysis. They won the Cup and kept their core so they should win it again. You're kidding right? Just because they won the Cup does not mean that they were (or still are) the best team in the league. I'm not taking anything away from them because they worked hard and deserved the Cup BUT they won the Cup because everything worked out in their favor. They took advantage of their opportinities. The only way they win the Cup again is if they get all the breaks again. But it usually doesn't work out that way. The Sharks have to change the intangebiles to win the Cup - motivation, hunger, leadership, etc. and that is pretty hard to do with the same group that keeps coming up short over and over and over.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 Heroes of Hockeytown beat me to it. Drake: FYI, they were 1st round losers. Silly Red Wings homer. The Sharks are 1st round losers now. Wait four years and they will be non-playoff teams despite being cup contenders every year. I forgot how epically they failed this year. Hey, at least when then lose in the second round this year people will consider it an improvement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wingfanatic4alltime 32 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 I lol'ed. Traditionally one puts the Cup winners at #1 and the Cup losers at #2, but why not throw a 2nd round loser in there instead. Honestly, how do hockey writers manage to put any faith in the 2nd round Sharks? 1st rd sharks you mean right Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 I lol'ed. Traditionally one puts the Cup winners at #1 and the Cup losers at #2, but why not throw a 2nd round loser in there instead. Honestly, how do hockey writers manage to put any faith in the 2nd round Sharks? Like many who visit this board, I thought about going into journalism. Then I saw how certain morons such as Rob Parker or whoever have to make themselves look like an idiot just so people will pay attention to them and then realized that I'd rather not lie that much just to have a career. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 I forgot how epically they failed this year. Hey, at least when then lose in the second round this year people will consider it an improvement. In your defense, they usually sputter in the second round based on their recent history. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 Like many who visit this board, I thought about going into journalism. Then I saw how certain morons such as Rob Parker or whoever have to make themselves look like an idiot just so people will pay attention to them and then realized that I'd rather not lie that much just to have a career. Sad, isn't it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeverForgetMac25 483 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 That's a stupid analysis. They won the Cup and kept their core so they should win it again. You're kidding right? Just because they won the Cup does not mean that they were (or still are) the best team in the league. I'm not taking anything away from them because they worked hard and deserved the Cup BUT they won the Cup because everything worked out in their favor. They took advantage of their opportinities. The only way they win the Cup again is if they get all the breaks again. But it usually doesn't work out that way. The Sharks have to change the intangebiles to win the Cup - motivation, hunger, leadership, etc. and that is pretty hard to do with the same group that keeps coming up short over and over and over.... First and foremost, who pissed in your Cheerios this morning? Who the hell said anything about them winning it again? I sure didn't. Now, was it stupid when the Wings were picked with that seed last year? You know what I find stupid, people that say the Penguins got all the breaks last June yet don't claim such a thing for the Wings the year before. Every Stanley Cup winner gets breaks, you don't win the Cup unless you get them. Like you said, they took advantage of those breaks and the Wings didn't. They kept their core together and are a young team. God forbid they're given the number one seed in a pointless pre-training camp Power Rankings *2 freaking* months after they won the Stanley Cup. I'd say your comment is the stupid one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doc Holiday 0 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 That's a stupid analysis. They won the Cup and kept their core so they should win it again. You're kidding right? Just because they won the Cup does not mean that they were (or still are) the best team in the league. I'm not taking anything away from them because they worked hard and deserved the Cup BUT they won the Cup because everything worked out in their favor. They took advantage of their opportinities. The only way they win the Cup again is if they get all the breaks again. But it usually doesn't work out that way. The cup goes through the Penguins, regardless of what you think the breaks were that they got. They were not supposed to have the depth Detroit had in the finals, right? Who brought the depth scoring when they needed it most? Pittsburgh. The cup is theirs and it will stay theirs until someone knocks them off, which won't be easy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 The cup goes through the Penguins, regardless of what you think the breaks were that they got. They were not supposed to have the depth Detroit had in the finals, right? Who brought the depth scoring when they needed it most? Pittsburgh. The cup is theirs and it will stay theirs until someone knocks them off, which won't be easy. Not unless they miss the playoffs. (hey, a man can dream, can't he? ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 That's a stupid analysis. They won the Cup and kept their core so they should win it again. You're kidding right? Just because they won the Cup does not mean that they were (or still are) the best team in the league. I'm not taking anything away from them because they worked hard and deserved the Cup BUT they won the Cup because everything worked out in their favor. They took advantage of their opportinities. The only way they win the Cup again is if they get all the breaks again. But it usually doesn't work out that way. The Sharks have to change the intangebiles to win the Cup - motivation, hunger, leadership, etc. and that is pretty hard to do with the same group that keeps coming up short over and over and over.... The whole point of it is this: The last NHL game played was a 2-1 victory for the Pens (I remember well because it was followed by excessive alcohol conusmption on my part). As it stands, based solely on the NHL games played recently you can pretty confidently say the Cup winners should be #1 and the runners-up should be #2 on any pre-season rankings. It's not about what's likely to happen 8 months from now, it's about the proof that's in the pudding right now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 Not unless they miss the playoffs. (hey, a man can dream, can't he? ) And then relocate to Kansas City. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 Devils missed the playoffsin '96...Just sayin. Yeah, remember how nice that felt? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 Yeah, remember how nice that felt? Yeah but it was ruined when Peter ******* Forsberg threaded a puck through Lidstrom of all people and then scored on Ozzie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heroes of Hockeytown 694 Report post Posted August 17, 2009 Yeah but it was ruined when Peter ******* Forsberg threaded a puck through Lidstrom of all people and then scored on Ozzie. Ozzie couldn't make a stop of Floppa to save his life. He is the one true Oz-killer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
