Originally Posted by mlyonsd:
The 7th game of the Stanley Cup is one of the greatest things to ever watch. We can all wish for a game 7 right? Am I right?:-)
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Yeah, I've been assuming it'll go at least 6, if not 7, but wanting it is a different story at this point, especially up 2 games to none.
As much as I want to watch this team as long as possible, I want them to finish this even more.
The longer the series goes, the more it will favor the Lightning. The Avs need to finish them off as quickly as possible. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mlyonsd:
Somebody should remind tampa the game started.
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Well, this is unexpected.
Really? They looked like shit against the Rangers in the first 2 games. Lethargic, slow etc. Got their ass's kicked and embarrassed. And then they clicked.
Like Daface, I started following when I moved down here. Still don't understand hockey like football. I know what a "B" gap is how to block or exploit it. No clue on hockey's minutiae.
The old timers down here say its a pattern. Look like shit and then turn it on later. Stamkos looks old to me this year. A lot slower. We will see. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Really? They looked like shit against the Rangers in the first 2 games. Lethargic, slow etc. Got their ass's kicked and embarrassed. And then they clicked.
Like Daface, I started following when I moved down here. Still don't understand hockey like football. I know what a "B" gap is how to block or exploit it. No clue on hockey's minutiae.
The old timers down here say its a pattern. Look like shit and then turn it on later. Stamkos looks old to me this year. A lot slower. We will see.
The big difference is that the Avs are more talented across the board except at goalie. Not saying Tampa can’t win, but they are going to have to play their best series of the playoffs to pull it off. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Really? They looked like shit against the Rangers in the first 2 games. Lethargic, slow etc. Got their ass's kicked and embarrassed. And then they clicked.
Like Daface, I started following when I moved down here. Still don't understand hockey like football. I know what a "B" gap is how to block or exploit it. No clue on hockey's minutiae.
The old timers down here say its a pattern. Look like shit and then turn it on later. Stamkos looks old to me this year. A lot slower. We will see.
Last night's game looked like 2 teams from different leagues playing. Not what I was expecting after they lost in OT the first game. I love playoff hockey so I hope it doesn't end in 4 games. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Really? They looked like shit against the Rangers in the first 2 games. Lethargic, slow etc. Got their ass's kicked and embarrassed. And then they clicked.
Like Daface, I started following when I moved down here. Still don't understand hockey like football. I know what a "B" gap is how to block or exploit it. No clue on hockey's minutiae.
The old timers down here say its a pattern. Look like shit and then turn it on later. Stamkos looks old to me this year. A lot slower. We will see.
While it's true that they came back from 0-2 last series, the advanced metrics suggest that the first two games against the Rangers were actually pretty close (and, in fact, the Bolts may have had an edge). Anything can happen, but I'm feeling pretty confident as an Avs fan.
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Really? They looked like shit against the Rangers in the first 2 games. Lethargic, slow etc. Got their ass's kicked and embarrassed. And then they clicked.
Like Daface, I started following when I moved down here. Still don't understand hockey like football. I know what a "B" gap is how to block or exploit it. No clue on hockey's minutiae.
The old timers down here say its a pattern. Look like shit and then turn it on later. Stamkos looks old to me this year. A lot slower. We will see.
Yeah, the couple things I've mentioned about them this postseason is they haven't been a model of consistency (they looked terrible in games 1 and 3 against the Leafs, then in game 1 against the Rangers), and there's a huge narrative going around that they play far better with a lead.
The biggest reason it was so surprising to me is they didn't look bad at all in game 1, besides Vasilevskiy in the first period. They skated well and it was a really fast game.
I expected them to at least compete last night... to have a different plan to slow down the Avalanche, much like the Blues did. Hell, they completely shut down the Panthers and I kind of wish I could go back and watch that series now (I missed most of it) to see what the hell happened.
I was completely expecting a ~2-1 or 3-2 game... and I still expect Vasilevskiy to go back to being a brick wall at some point and not giving up relatively simple goals to Josh Manson and Darren Helm... and at least giving Kuemper a little work. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
While it's true that they came back from 0-2 last series, the advanced metrics suggest that the first two games against the Rangers were actually pretty close (and, in fact, the Bolts may have had an edge). Anything can happen, but I'm feeling pretty confident as an Avs fan.
Hmm, surprised the Rangers game 1 looked so close... I thought TB looked lethargic in that game, too (not that the Rangers are high-flying or nearly as deep as the Avalanche though), and that the Rangers looked quite a bit better.
Game 2 was a lot closer and from what I remember, even kind of lucky for the Rangers to win it.... between those two games, my thought was at least show up in game 1 and you would have had a chance to be tied. Fuck around in game 1 though, and a couple unlucky bounces and you're down 2 games to none.
And that's of course even more so with the Avalanche... Vasilevskiy was quite a bit better in the 2nd and 3rd periods of game 1 and a lucky bounce here or there and they win that game. Fuck around in game 2 though and you don't stand a chance (obvious enough to say for most SCF games, much less against this team). [Reply]
