Neowin's NHL 2004 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread

By Steven
in The Sporting Arena

 Share

Recommended Posts

Proficient

EVO VIII

Posted
Posted
This game had the most powerplay minutes in the history of the Stanley Cup Playoffs at 90+ minutes with most being in favor of the Flames. When you have that advantage and you don't score while Tampa scored 4 goals without luck but good play. None of our goals was luck. They were cleaning up a saved shot which isn't luck because the no team should allow a cleanup shot. Now our cleanup shots didn't go in off of another player by luck. The person that scored all 4 of our goals was the same person that shot at and into an empty net past the goalie. That you can't deny.

Now this will be a very good series but at least I can say and backup that Tampa's win was much more earned than the Flames win. You tell me what other advantage did the Flames have that they didn't have.

umm there was not 90+ minutes worth of powerplay. wtf are you on? :wacko: do you know how hockey works? there was 60 minutes of regulation time, AND 90+ minutes worth of penalties NOT worth of powerplay minutes. According to you the whole freakin game was on a powerplay, and then some. :rolleyes:

Community Regular

SeaClearly

Posted
Posted
oh would you shut up, with every post you make it makes you sound more like an idiot, its just 1 game wooopeee you'll have bad calls all the time.

To say that we as canadians should be ashamed about our team is just retarted, we could have said that about TB last game, so please make everyone happy and just stfu.

Well I'm finished with you because you are an as*whole that can't say anthing without the good old STFU quote. Oh and we asked for calls but maybe you didn't see all the tripping calls, holding calls, and high sticking calls that weren't called on the Flames. Maybe you didn't see St. Louis getting thrown into the net not one but three times with nothing called. Maybe you didn't see the high sticking that wasn't called at the end of the game even though the damn stick broke in half. This was so one sided and weren't average missed calls no matter what f*cking way you slice it.

Community Regular

SeaClearly

Posted
Posted
are you joking?? have you played hockey? Most of the time, especially when their goalie is outstanding... the best strategy is to crowd the net and just fire it through traffic, you get good bounces, nice deflections and big rebounds... that is a strategy, not luck. I know when im standing infront of the net, even if the puck is comming no where near the blade (where you can redirect a shot), i still try to get part of my shaft on the puck and cover thegoalies face with the balde of my stick. To say its luck, then you can say ANY goal is luck...

Yes you are exactly right that this is a good way to play given the way the team is playing but that doesn't make the goals earned. Those goals rely on luck as to where they go and who they hit off of. That type of play can make you look very bad or very good but its unearned none the less. That is a good way to play and the style that most teams play but still those goals aren't earned. Now if a shot hit off the goalie after it went through traffic and hit off the goalie and a rebound shot was hit into the net that would be an earned goal. Still whatever wins games is all that counts but don't say they earned their goals because when you have no control over where it goes its not earned. At least when you hit at the net away from traffic where all thats between the puck is you and the goalie than a goal like that is earned. If you can't understand the concept of that you never will. The fact I was making is that an earned goal is much much harder to get than a traffic unearned goal. Any team can shoot through traffic and get lucky and win but only the best teams can win without using traffic. I don't think the Flames are that kind of team. I think the Flyers and Red Wings are much better because like Tampa Bay they can win without using traffic even though all these teams use it uncluding Tampa Bay they don't have to rely on it to win.

Community Regular

SeaClearly

Posted
Posted
umm there was not 90+ minutes worth of powerplay. wtf are you on? :wacko: do you know how hockey works? there was 60 minutes of regulation time, AND 90+ minutes worth of penalties NOT worth of powerplay minutes. According to you the whole freakin game was on a powerplay, and then some. :rolleyes:

Your right and I should have checked my post over. I meant 90+ penalty minutes. Most of the minutes in hockey are served at the sametime. A powerplay could be only for two minutes but could have three players out and have 6 minutes but still the powerplay only goes for two minutes. I know and realize this but didn't use the right word.

Community Regular

SeaClearly

Posted
Posted
Get out of this thread, troll.

I hope you weren't calling me a troll because I just replied in my defense just like you replied to my post. Assuming your calling me a troll I don't see my posts as any different than your posts. I'm talking about the subject at hand and if talking about the Lighning is being a troll because I'm not talking about the Flames than maybe this thread should be called the Flames playoffs. I'm not going into a Flames thread nor am I going into an apple thread and bashing apple computers even though I wouldn't do that. So how would I be a troll. We have different opinions of everything and just because your views aren't the same as mine doesn't make me a troll. I got very specific about one poster with the STFU statement but besides that I said my opinions just you they did. If that makes me a troll than every member on this board is a troll.

Also I never even talked about your message because I saw what I saw and my views are different. People see what they want to see and that is fact. Maybe I saw things wrong and with that said there was no point in starting a war for that reason. Now with that said I'm not calling you out so if you flame me and accuse me of doing so I will report you. I want no fights at all but I do want to view my opinions and not be flamed or called a troll for expressing them.

I will not be posting anymore in this thread as to not start any problems since I feel that my opinions of the game aren't wanted but hated.

Community Regular

SeaClearly

Posted
Posted
damn, whats with all the baby's momma drama? this thread is usually pretty chill. this is gonna be a good series, i just wish the games were closer...

I agree this is going to be a very good series and the way it looks is that we won't be having any close games. But at least these games are fun to watch. I never liked teams that trapped all the time but I have to say these last two games have been great games to watch. These two teams styles of play are the best as far as watching on TV. The one rule I would like to see changed would be getting rid of the red line on the two line pass. That would make the game go much faster and would result in a better game there and on TV. That would just open up the game. But the fact is this series is much needed for TV. For a ABC and ESPN they couldn't have got anything better as far as the quality of games. If hockey could ever get more TV viewers things would be quite different but hockey is the one sports that just doesn't work well with TV. I'm hoping that HDTV might change this. I also hope next year won't be a strike year.

Grand Master

Steffan

Posted
Posted
damn, whats with all the baby's momma drama? this thread is usually pretty chill. this is gonna be a good series, i just wish the games were closer...

I know what you mean. There was an outsider that trying to add drama to the thread. We dont need drama in this thread, that's taken care of during the games.

Don't worry about the blowouts, the series will get much tigher from now on.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups

      By zikalify · Posted

      Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups by Paul Hill Fears that increasing government control of social media risks regulatory capture by the biggest social media firms were raised again recently. Bluesky’s chief operating officer said in an interview that social media bans for children and tighter regulations for social media firms risk creating a world where there are only a few social media platforms run by companies with the deepest pockets. Regulations on social media firms have been very lax since they appeared for mainstream users in the 2000’s. This gave Meta, Snapchat, and Google time to build up their user bases and get entrenched, with Meta being the most successful. Now that Meta has succeeded, it has been attempting regulatory capture. By pushing for more regulations of social media, Meta hopes to make it more difficult for rivals to challenge it. For its part, it doesn’t need to worry about the cost of regulation because it has a lot of money to spend, whereas startups do not. Speaking to CNBC, Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, said: “I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team. So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces. These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do... so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right.” She said that while she is not against regulation, there needs to be more channels between the small to mid-sized players and regulators to help protect them. She says that big tech players, on the other hand, “who we know are circumventing regulation,” need to be regulated. Essentially, the Bluesky position is one of nuance, rather than absolutes. While Bluesky’s proposal may preserve competition in the social media space, it still doesn’t address the massive privacy implications these age verification measures introduce, such as handing over sensitive identity documents to access age-gated content. Source: CNBC
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By Michael Scrip · Posted

    • Still using Classic Outlook? Microsoft highlights 15 reasons to switch to New Outlook

      By davesickofenshittification · Posted

      it dosnt support onprem exchange. it dosnt support mapi-calls. the views are all worse/limited. its slower. it cant see public folder calendars. we already have webmail. the list of other missing features is pretty huge but i only see it when customers call to say their email isnt working, and 9/10 times its cause they accidentality changed to outlooknew(new). Hold the line everyone!
    • Halo: Campaign Evolved is out next month with new prequel missions

      By ZipZapRap · Posted

      yeah, this looks beautiful. Damn this winter's going to be great.
    • 25th anniversary Xbox Series X unveiled with classic translucent green design

      By ZipZapRap · Posted

      Same. I want that controller!

  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      249
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      70
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!