NHL Playoffs – April 16th
Posted by jtbourne on April 16, 2009 · 7 Comments
ShareThis
(4) Chicago vs. (5) Calgary
Game one between these teams was more pivotal than any other series, easily (honorable mention to Canucks/Blues). I mean pivotal like Peter’s decision to go to the hypnotherapist in Office Space.
The Flames, a team on the decline, badly needed that to right the ship. Nothing like being up 2-1 with five minutes left and choking to blow a major hole in the hull.
The Hawks, a young team, needed that too. As a player, when you get off to a good start, it’s just so much easier to keep the ball rolling than it is to start it up. Dangly guys like Havlat and Toews don’t have to second guess themselves now; if they fall down a few games in this series, they start thinking “boy, I guess I need to change the way I ____”. This little bit of confidence was huge for them.
And by the way, does Olli Jokinen drink like, 80 cups of coffee prior to everything he’s ever done ever? He looks shocked every time I’ve ever seen him. Maybe he’s still in awe that an NHL team committed over 20 million to an 11 year NHL vet with zero games playoff experience.
(2) Detroit vs. Columbus
Hey, I can’t watch ‘em all.
Despite my fellow contributors article on The Hockey News site about Columbus being perfectly tooled for an upset, let me respectfully say this: The foregone conclusion that is this series started as planned, 4-1 Wings. Babcock is the best coach in the NHL.
(1) San Jose vs. (8) Anaheim
Interesting… very interesting.
I’m wondering, if the Sharks were to manage to puke in another three games like they did tonight (and they did puke… 137 goals at home this year, and not one on a goalie who’s name I’d literally have to google to print here), is it possible for an organization to get a complex?
I mean really, with the point totals they’ve had in past years (90+ five straight years, 100+ in four of those) and their struggles in playoffs, wouldn’t it be impossible to enjoy next season as a fan of theirs? Every game they won, their entire fan base and every sports pundit would be going, “well sure, but… ”
(1) Bruins vs. (8) Montreal
Since this game went exactly how it would have played out had we let a Playstation run a “what-to-expect” simulation, let me use it as a forum to discuss this:
How. Goddamn. Hard. Are guys shooting the puck now? Kovalev shot a puck that Al MacInnis watched from home and went “whoa”. Then Chara decided to swing his stick that was probably ordered triple-stiff but flexes like an intermediate shaft because it’s eight feet long, and shot a puck so hard a modern day goalie thought “I’m not sure if I’m wearing enough gear to justify standing in front of that”.
Even Getzlaf in the Anaheim game drove the nail in the Sharks coffin with a snapshot from the top of the circles that came out of the net quicker than a roadrunner on blow. Goalies must love that we keep making their gear smaller, which, by the way, I’m in favour of. But I’ll save that rant for another soapbox. Guess I’ll need something to write about in the off-season.
I'm a hockey player turned writer. After playing for Alaska Anchorage in the WCHA (NCAA), I carried on with an NHL tryout (New York Islanders in 2007) before spending a couple seasons in the AHL/ECHL (last year was 2008-09). My father, Bob Bourne, won four Stanley Cups with the Islanders in the '80's, as did my fiancee's dad, Clark Gillies. I'm now the web editor for theScore's hockey blog "Backhand Shelf."
Loved the way Havlat ran show in that game after taking a dirty one from Cammalleri. You can’t beat a close-up of a guy who just scored an OT winner – gets you jacked up just watching. It also lets you read lips and it got me thinking – at what point in a hockey player’s career does it just become absolutely automatic that the first thing they say after scoring a goal is “F***in’ Rights” or “F***in Rights Boys”?
Olli Jokinen’s head looks like a skull. A gigantic baby skull.
My response – hahahaha! I’d right “lol”, but I only smiled, so it would’ve been insincere.
Comrie has a formidable giant baby head as well. But apparently that’s good enough for the duffer.
I was actually going to write a bit on this: I feel like Havlat was one of the pioneers of the “It’s okay to be a one-dimensional super dangly risk-taker that everybody loves to watch”. It was the success of guys like him that made GM’s take risks on today’s uber-danglemongers that’re having success.
Also, as a (borderline soft) supposedly skilled right winger, I took 45 of those exact punches off face-offs, so I was pumped to see Marty take it to the flames.
As for the mandatory “f***in’ Rights”, with the “boys” or not, I’m not sure how we ended up with that as the go-to. Watching someone score in OT definitely gives me that little rush of pleasure (Fresno last year!) – I just wish there were better alternatives than “yaaaayyyyy” and “wooohooo”. I guess “eeeek” isn’t real cool either. Let’s start a new one. Next reader to score in OT, yell “bonanza!” or “dopamine!” – just something new – than write us and report how it went over.
Okay, this is almost getting poll worthy, for NHL player who’s looks are the most conversation worthy. Early front-runners: Chris Mason, The Sedins, Olli Jokinen (no nod to Comrie, possible nomination for Mats “sunlight makes me melt” Sundin).
Okay, ever since you mentioned that you were trying to define the Sedins looks I can’t stop associating them with the “Bananas in Pajamas”. For some reason it just seems like you can talk yourself into the Sedins morphing into those guys somehow. I wish I knew more (anything) about Photo Shop because I think you could do something with this picture http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=66attx&s=3