1/23 GDT : Blues 1 at Red Wings 3

[rrasco 1,312]

Heh, ooooooook. As a regular member, that statement by you surprises me.

Its not bad to admit that some members are idiots. I will say that the Blues forum has more of it, but still, we have our fair share of idiocy.

I wasn't disagreeing with that sentiment in the least bit.

LGB is a cesspool; please don't bring it here. I understand you calling out someone, but not if it involves completely derailing the GDT. I know PMs don't pack quite the same punch as a public flogging, but that's the only alternative I can offer you right now.

Cool beans.

[Nightfall 871]

Well you're right, no team is going to win a 7 game series playing pathetic hockey! That doesn't mean there haven't been upsets. How about Detroit getting swept by Anaheim in 03.

I am not saying there aren't upsets, such as a lower seeded team beating an upper seeded one. I am saying that the better team always wins 7 games. Are you saying that Detroit was the better team in that series because they weren't. Not by a long shot. Anaheim was the better team and they advanced all the way to the cup final that year. Just like Detroit was the better team in 2002.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Nightfall

[Tim.D 176]

If you can find the play where Holmstroms stick is knocked out of his hand and then seconds later he was intereferred with I would appreciate it. I want to see if the interference/pick is as bad as I though it was at the time.

Thanks

Don't know if you'll see this, but do you remember what period this was in? This would help a lot. Thanks. Anyone want any clips? My video editing program is having trouble with these large (2hr) HD video files. So these ones might be a little late because I'm trying out a new program.

[GMRwings1983 8,793]

Milbury just called Howard a "Good ole Canadian boy"

[vladdy16 2,154]

Don't know if you'll see this, but do you remember what period this was in? This would help a lot. Thanks. Anyone want any clips? My video editing program is having trouble with these large (2hr) HD video files. So these ones might be a little late because I'm trying out a new program.

I need the whole freakin' game. Missed the replay at midnight as well.

I'd be thrilled with whatever you can post. Seems like I missed a great game.

[wingfan13 44]

Don't know if you'll see this, but do you remember what period this was in? This would help a lot. Thanks. Anyone want any clips? My video editing program is having trouble with these large (2hr) HD video files. So these ones might be a little late because I'm trying out a new program.

I believe it was the second but the Blues were skating right to left on the TV. I could be wrong. Thanks for trying

[Tim.D 176]

I'm starting to upload videos now, if anyone is interested. I'm starting with the goals then I'll get to the fun stuff like scrums and fights and hits. If you have any suggestions, I urge you to say something, because I don't want to miss a good part of this great game. Here is the Youtube Playlist:

Edited January 25, 2012 by Tim.D

[Tim.D 176]

Ok I got all I could do tonight. I have everything but the hits (minus Stuart) and that call wingfan13 wanted. I should have those up tomorrow if everything goes as planned. All the videos that I did tonight should be up in the playlist

now. I'll check back tomorrow to see if anyone requests anything else.

[AceInTheSleeve 97]

I am not saying there aren't upsets, such as a lower seeded team beating an upper seeded one. I am saying that the better team always wins 7 games. Are you saying that Detroit was the better team in that series because they weren't. Not by a long shot. Anaheim was the better team and they advanced all the way to the cup final that year. Just like Detroit was the better team in 2002.

So your definition of a better team IS the one who wins the 7 game series. So of course you conclude that 'the better team always wins'

All orange tigers are orange...what a silly argument

[Guest Crymson]

If you are the losing team and are whining about that non call, then its an excuse.

If you are the winning team, then you feel good about yourself.

The sooner people realize that the best team is the one that is able to overcome obstacles and fight through adversity is the one that wins the cup, the better off we all will be. Until we get to that point, we will have 16 groups of fans come playoff time believing their team is the one that should win the cup and if they don't, then the league or the refs are against them.

There are times when the actions of the referees can make the difference in a series.

[Nightfall 871]

So your definition of a better team IS the one who wins the 7 game series. So of course you conclude that 'the better team always wins'

All orange tigers are orange...what a silly argument

Not an argument, a fact. To call a orange tiger orange isn't an argument. Its a statement of fact that is irrefutable. So far, I have not heard anyone come up with a single team in the history of the NHL that lost in a playoff series that was the better team. Just like I am sure that we won't hear about a single orange tiger that was called yellow.

There are times when the actions of the referees can make the difference in a series.

Name one.

I will bet that anyone will be able to point out other games in the series that were won or lost by the players. One game may swing because of a bad call, but in the end, a 7 game series is decided by the players.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Nightfall

[wings_fanatic 677]

Guys this is a pointless argument. Take 2006, the Wings lost to the Oilers in 6 games. The Oilers were NOT even close to being a better team then the Wings that year, but their goalie won them the series, and our goalie played a large part in us losing the series. There is more to a 7 game series then just the players... there are bad calls made for both teams involved (2009 vs. the Ducks when Hossa scored but the ref said no goal), lucky bounces to decide games (2009 game 1 vs. the Pens the Wings got 2 lucky goals that bounced off the boards), and also coaching. Also, we have to take into account injuries that teams have, and the fact that different teams have swings of momentum at different times. With that said, it is hard to justify that a 7 game series will always prove who the better team is.

Now with that said, we can boil it down to saying a 7 game series will usually decide who is the better team at the time, however there are exceptions to that where the worse team actually wins the series (Oilers against the Wings in 2006).

Now regarding who the better team is here out of the Wings or the Blues, I don't think there is much question that the Wings are clearly superior talentwise. However, the Blues have proved that they can hang with the Wings during certain times. I am still pretty confident to say the Blues would not outlast the Wings in a 7 game series, but by no means am I putting down the Blues. THey have a great coach, and a great system that they all buy into, but at the end of the day, the just cannot match up against the Wings.

[Guest Crymson]

Name one.

I will bet that anyone will be able to point out other games in the series that were won or lost by the players. One game may swing because of a bad call, but in the end, a 7 game series is decided by the players.

I already did. That series was tremendously close. In the end, a horrible non-call on the world's best player gave the win to the Kings.

[Nightfall 871]

I already did. That series was tremendously close. In the end, a horrible non-call on the world's best player gave the win to the Kings.

Sorry, but I disagree. I saw a couple games of that series on ESPN Classic back in the day, and the Kings played better hockey in stretches. The "non-call" in a 7th game is no excuse for not burying your chances in previous games. They had their chances and could not convert.

[Nightfall 871]

Guys this is a pointless argument. Take 2006, the Wings lost to the Oilers in 6 games. The Oilers were NOT even close to being a better team then the Wings that year, but their goalie won them the series, and our goalie played a large part in us losing the series. There is more to a 7 game series then just the players... there are bad calls made for both teams involved (2009 vs. the Ducks when Hossa scored but the ref said no goal), lucky bounces to decide games (2009 game 1 vs. the Pens the Wings got 2 lucky goals that bounced off the boards), and also coaching. Also, we have to take into account injuries that teams have, and the fact that different teams have swings of momentum at different times. With that said, it is hard to justify that a 7 game series will always prove who the better team is.

Now with that said, we can boil it down to saying a 7 game series will usually decide who is the better team at the time, however there are exceptions to that where the worse team actually wins the series (Oilers against the Wings in 2006).

Now regarding who the better team is here out of the Wings or the Blues, I don't think there is much question that the Wings are clearly superior talentwise. However, the Blues have proved that they can hang with the Wings during certain times. I am still pretty confident to say the Blues would not outlast the Wings in a 7 game series, but by no means am I putting down the Blues. THey have a great coach, and a great system that they all buy into, but at the end of the day, the just cannot match up against the Wings.

The Oilers went all the way to the cup finals and you are going to make that argument? I might agree if they got swept in the 2nd round, but you have to give credit where credit is due. In 3 of the 6 games the shots were within 4 for each team. The Oilers kept the chances to the outside for the most part. Detroit didn't really show much grit or determination in that series for me to call them the "better team".

I do agree with your analysis on the Blues and the Wings. With all luck though, we hopefully won't have to play them in the playoffs. Thats going to be a grind of a series, but it potentially could be a very exciting series.

[Buppy 1,720]

Sorry, but I disagree. I saw a couple games of that series on ESPN Classic back in the day, and the Kings played better hockey in stretches. The "non-call" in a 7th game is no excuse for not burying your chances in previous games. They had their chances and could not convert.

That's circular logic. As someone else already pointed out, you're just defining "better" as the team who wins.

Hypothetical situation:

Overtime in game 7. Obviously it's been a close series and both teams have capitalized on some opportunities, and failed to capitalize on others. Team A scores but the goal is mistakenly waived off. Team B takes advantage and scores to win the series. Which team would be better?

No amount of luck or reffing can completely take the players out of the equation, but there are factors in every series besides the players that do have an effect on the outcome. Most playoff matchups, especially after the 1st round, pit two teams fairly close in ability. A little more luck to one side can be enough to tip the balance from "slightly worse" to "slightly better", and thus change the outcome of a series.

Also, it is impossible to say how a series might change if any particular event were different. A bad call that leads to a PP goal and a victory in game one may very well change the winner of a series, or it might have made no difference at all. Unless you explicitly define the parameters for what "better" means, you can't actually claim that the better team always wins. It seems you just want to define it a whichever team wins 4 games.

I'll say that the team that capitilizes on a greater number of opportunities will almost always win a 7 game series. That may or may not be the "better" team, but who really cares. Trophies go to winners, not betters.