Home | Away

Round two

Very quickly, because I have no time for leisurely Internet discourse today:  I went six for eight with my Official and Deeply Considered Predictions, and would have gone eight for eight if (a) the Sharks had decided to fold in the second round, as usual, instead of collapsing the moment the playoffs began, and (b) the Devils could have held on for the final two minutes of game seven.  (Great series, though!  Almost as exciting as Celtics-Bulls in that Other Sport.) Let the record show that I said Capitals in seven, despite my lifelong loyalties.

I’ll save the first-round analysis and second-round details for later, because I’ve got to beat that Lemieux fellow (who went four for eight in round one) to the punch, and the dang Chicago-Vancouver series is already under way.  Without further ado or explanation:  Penguins over Capitals in six; Bruins over Hurricanes in seven; Canucks over Black Hawks in seven (and yes, I thought so even before last night’s squeaky Canucks victory); Red Wings over Mighty Merely Ducks in six.

Over to you, Scott!

And oh yes, I’m hoping Presidente Chávez names himself to the Supreme Court.

Posted by on 05/01 at 03:29 PM
  1. I went 5 for 8. Perhaps Joe Thornton can get a job flipping burgers or something. And what’s up with the Devils opening the bran door so late so often? As for the Caps winning, they dinged so many posts it was only a matter of time until they found their range.

    And so: Caps in 6; Bruins in 6; Canucks in 7; Devils in 5.

    Jagr says he might want to play for Edmonton next season. Hmm. Oh, and the snow has stopped, although places to the south of us were still getting hammered the other day.

    D

    Posted by Derryl Murphy  on  05/01  at  04:58 PM
  2. Ahem “Barn” door. A bran door might have something to do with being plugged up, if you know what I mean.

    D

    Posted by Derryl Murphy  on  05/01  at  04:59 PM
  3. I read it as “brain door”. Sorta made sense.

    As I said in the thread at CT, picking individual series winners is for the little people, but the Bruins and Pens are the best of the Eastern lot and fortunately do not play each other this round. In the West, Detroit.

    I was hoping Hugo would pick Zombie(presumed) Oscar Zeta Acosta.

    Posted by  on  05/01  at  06:46 PM
  4. Hot sports opinion:

    Ducks will beat Red Wings in 7.

    Oh yes.

    Posted by  on  05/01  at  07:48 PM
  5. In an environment literally littered with Canuck fandom, it would be unthinkable for me to utter your prediction outside the boundaries of this blog.  But are the Red Wings really that beatable this year (lose two to quackers)???

    Would that make Hugo the Chief President Justice Supreme????

    Posted by  on  05/01  at  09:18 PM
  6. Not knowing any results, except the hinted at Canucks victory AND being almost entirely unburdened by hockey on cable here in the woodsy place: Ducks over Red Wings in five (why? last year was a freak accident; greatest circus on ice until the playoffs, etc. etc.), Blackhawks over Canucks in seven (I really should go with the Canucks, but I grew up watching the Hawks farm team, so...), Capitals over Penguins in six (Capitals look cardiac good, plus Sergei Federov), and I have absolutely no clue about the Bruins or the Hurricanes this year and I should not say anything, but honest to God I had some real bad luck there picking against the Hurricanes, so Carolina in seven.

    I think, yes, I just picked completely opposite of you; not intended against you, just gut-level picks, as in nothing rational involved. One of us will do really bad and it’ll probably be me.

    max
    [’Al Franken for Supreme Court!’]

    Posted by  on  05/01  at  10:48 PM
  7. Here’s a headline:

    OUTRAGE! Former C-U resident disses Hawks, sells out to Canada! (Read all the sordid detail on page B7.)

    Posted by  on  05/02  at  12:21 AM
  8. And by “sordid details” I mean “taxpayer-funded junkets”.

    Posted by  on  05/02  at  10:31 AM
  9. Perhaps Joe Thornton can get a job flipping burgers or something. And what’s up with the Devils opening the bran door so late so often? As for the Caps winning, they dinged so many posts it was only a matter of time until they found their range.

    That wasn’t Joe Thornton.  Now it can finally be told:  every April, Joe Thornton is kidnapped by the Anaheim organization and replaced with a dead ringer with all of Thornton’s skills except the ability to score.  It’s worked for three years now, and the league has only just caught on.

    As for the Devils’ bran door, credit the amazing keep at the point by Gleason, followed by his even more amazing perfect saucer-pass (from his knees, while falling down!) to Pitkanen.  As for the game winner, watch that big lunk Colin White overcommit to LaRose in the neutral zone at the :35 mark, allowing Staal the open right-wing lane that led to the goal.

    And listen, folks (especially those of you named Christian), I’m rooting for Chicago.  You have to love these kids, erasing not one but two three-goal deficits in the postseason (game 4 in Calgary, game 1 in Vancouver, each time by scoring all three goals in one period).  But you really have to wonder WTF Cam Barker was thinking, jumping up into a four-on-two with under two minutes remaining (and getting trapped by the Canucks net as Vancouver developed the fatal three-on-one the other way).  This isn’t hindsight on my part; as that play developed, I said to Janet, “OMFG, Chicago’s playing this as if they’re one goal down and have to press.  This is gonna be very dangerous.” And it was.  Go Hawks!  But check the scoreboard next time and don’t throw four guys at the net with 1:30 left in a tie game.

    Posted by Michael  on  05/02  at  03:59 PM
  10. Discussing today’s games very early this morning, with my Amtrak conductor buddy who grew up in Edmonton and lives in Vancouver, he reminded me that all good Canucks fans desire to feel as complete underdogs.  This is because everytime they have “pretended” that they have a winning team, they have been cheated by fate or other miseries and plagues.  Thus such a victory in the first game is considered a considerable fluke.  He did suggest that if there is a team that perhaps can defeat the RedWings it will be the Ducks. Because they play a style of hockey that derives from the Viking berzerkers: anarchic chaos with no set offense, giant guys who like to hit people, and a smashing in your face defense.  He thinks that this series might take a lot of the strength out of Detroit.  Speaking of Detroit, he couldn’t answer why the Canucks play in the General Motors Place?

    Posted by  on  05/02  at  08:49 PM
  11. Spyder, I think your conductor buddy is basically right.  You can’t outskate or outfinesse the Red Wings—you basically have to pummel them with your 6’4” 250-pound forwards, Ducks-style.  But this brings up a world-historical question.  See, whenever teams with behemoth guys like Perry, Getzlaf and Ryan play teams with guys like Franzen, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Hossa, I root for the latter not merely because they play better hockey but because they are better for hockey.  And you know what else?  Look at the ice-time stats for Anaheim.  Getzlaf played 27:55, which is unheard of for a forward.  They don’t have a fourth line. Four forwards—Getzlaf, Ryan, Perry, Selanne—do all their scoring.  That’s so old school.  Whereas your truly cool teams—the ‘06 Sabres, the ‘09 Bruins—have seven or eight 20-goal scorers, three scoring lines, four full lines.  That’s the new paradigm for the post-clutchingngrabbing NHL, or it should be.  So, all that said, go Red Wings.

    But why the Canucks play in a GM Place, I can’t tell you.  It just seems wrong.

    Posted by Michael  on  05/02  at  10:01 PM
  12. Well, Hawks take on tonight… to salvage the day after a dreadful Bulls loss.

    Posted by  on  05/02  at  11:40 PM
  13. And Christian, I hope you got to see the Hawks score five goals on Luongo in the space of fifteen minutes tonight (three in the second half of the second period, two more in the first five minutes of the third).  They’re crazy, these Chicago kids:  they keep thinking they can come back from 4-1, 3-0, 2-0 ... and they just might be the most exciting team in the playoffs.

    Too bad about those Bulls.  I was hoping for a 6OT finale.

    Posted by Michael  on  05/03  at  01:00 AM
  14. Sadly, no VS on my TeeVee. I had to listen on an online radio feed that was about 5 minutes delayed…

    Posted by  on  05/03  at  01:52 AM
  15. Hopefully BO will keep SCOTUS free of the reds or Brandeis-like sob sisters, and uphold chi-town tradition, say with another Scalia-like wise guy. Fuggetaboutit.

    Posted by Ezra Hound  on  05/03  at  09:02 AM
  16. My arrogant confident predictions should be read to include the following unvoiced thoughts, “The Pens have not handled Ovechkin that well, and if whats-his-name in goal for the Caps makes some unconscious saves it could spell trouble.”

    Posted by  on  05/03  at  10:34 AM
  17. c’mon everyone knows the SCOTUS seat is going to Willam Ayers. That was part of the deal. (conspiracy)

    e.

    Posted by  on  05/03  at  11:09 AM
  18. Let’s just say I’m not looking forward to Obama nominating a “pragmatist” (ie, centrist) only for Republicans to block the “radical” nomination, with full support of Fred “up-or-down-vote” Hiatt. We are already getting preemptive whining about all the highly qualified old white males who are outrageously being excluded from consideration. My prediction of the end result: Richard Posner.

    Posted by  on  05/03  at  01:29 PM
  19. spyder’s conductor buddy who thinks that this series might take a lot of the strength out of Detroit is looking prescient right now.

    And although I heartily agree with Michael’s assessment of which team’s success is better for hockey, the Ducks’ most impressive moments in today’s 2-and-a-smidgen-OT game had a lot to do with skill and speed.  Wisniewski in particular: poke-checking away a sure Wings goal from behind, back-checking to set up the winning goal… aaargh! Make the images go away!!

    Posted by Nell  on  05/03  at  08:15 PM
  20. Do you think we could get Obama for the Supremes and Chávez for President?  Or, better, could they trade presidencies?  Please?

    Posted by 99  on  05/04  at  02:02 AM
  21. Oh, well, wait, I guess that already happened and I was just still watching the horizon for Putin’s head to rear....

    Carry on.

    Posted by 99  on  05/04  at  02:37 AM
  22. I don’t really follow football that much.

    Meanwhile, sometimes I do wish that President Obama really were an Evil Mastermind of Chicago-style politics.  That would lead to Dawn Johnsen being nominated, in a delicious application of “No, screw you.”

    Posted by  on  05/04  at  11:35 AM
  23. Dang. Was going to complain about the no-call on the trip off the faceoff leading to Washington’s 3rd goal, but the Pens had muffed the PP before that so badly that ... never mind, I’m still complaining—a miserable no-call. But damn, try finishing a chance or two, Pens.

    Posted by  on  05/04  at  09:43 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: Every so often

Previous entry: The next level

<< Back to main