2006/2007 Hockey Season Thread

[The Sultan of Swank]

Because you're a gay?

[Clawson]

Nah he'd still cheer for Montreal if that was the case.

[NobBe Nobbs]

Nah he'd still cheer for Montreal if that was the case.

[Hajjhowe]

I'm not gay, I just don't feel like following the cult that is Montreal Canadiens fans

Edited February 13, 2007 by Hajjhowe

[lari]

Haha, Detroit sucks. I love it.

And Michael Leighton is awesome.

[The Sultan of Swank]

Nah he'd still cheer for Montreal if that was the case.

[Toe]

Toronto loses in overtime and let's the Islanders draw even with them for 9th. The only team Toronto gains ground on with the single point is the Canadiens, who really need to change something.

[SeanDMan]

Haha, Detroit sucks. I love it.

We're one more implosion away from Stefan Liv in the NHL. Rep, bitches.

[The Sultan of Swank]

AUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I feel like Charlie Brown...

[lari]

Tonight is the biggest game of the season. Why? Because my friend is a big Penguins fan. Ever since the 92 finals, the Hawks/Penguins games have been very important, especially now that they don't play more than once a year. Winner gets the drinks, loser pays. I don't like my odds this year, but goddammit, gotta support my Hawks.

[The Sultan of Swank]

Go Hawks! I need Ottawa, Jersey and Pittsburgh to lose tonight. I'm sure Florida could beat Ottawa and the Hawks, Pittsburgh. But with Montreal, a Bantam team could give them a run right now. How did Higgins hit the post last night, he had about a foot of space and he jams the puck into the post with his stick!!! Argh!

[Clawson]

Damn, Montreal sucks. We get a win in the next two games and we'll have had the same amount of points at the 59 game mark.

[Toe]

Damn, Montreal sucks. We get a win in the next two games and we'll have had the same amount of points at the 59 game mark.

[lari]

I fucking hate shootouts. That wasn't a real loss. It was a draw to me. With Khabby playing better, it would have been a W. I think I'm going to buy him one pint in the cheapest place I can find and that's it.

EDIT: my friend, that is. Not Khabibulin. With his $6.75M salary, he can get his own damn drinks.

I was actually looking forward to a Lalime vs Thibault tonight, but I suppose neither coach wanted to lose.

Edited February 15, 2007 by lari

[Evil Chase K]

Well that goal with six men on the ice shouldn't have counted so it should've ended 4-3 in regulation.

[Guest Grapehead]

Went through the whole season, looking at eastern teams, and this is how the conference would look with the 3 point format for regulation wins:

Buffalo 105

New Jersey 102

Carolina 91

Ottawa 100

Penguins 90

Tampa Bay 89

Atlanta 88

Montreal 86

-----------------------

Toronto 85

Islanders 83

Rangers 79

Florida 77

Washington 72

Boston 61

Flyers 51

basically the same I guess... however Ottawa is a lot closer to Buffalo, who have won a great deal less regulation games than Ottawa, who has the most with 31.

[Toe]

I would like to see the point for an overtime loss or shootout loss eliminated. It has benefitted my team, but I hate that a team gets something from a loss. So what if your team played well enough to keep it tied for three periods? You should be playing for the win.

[lari]

I like two points for a win, but give only one for a shootout win. None for the loser, no matter how they end up losing.

[SeanDMan]

I would like to see the point for an overtime loss or shootout loss eliminated. It has benefitted my team, but I hate that a team gets something from a loss. So what if your team played well enough to keep it tied for three periods? You should be playing for the win.

The only problem with that system is that it punishes teams like Nashville and Buffalo, who are a popcorn team. The Detroits and New Jerseys can easily play a complete game of fall asleep hockey for sixty minutes and then run their 4 good offensive players in a 1-0-1-0-1-0 rotation for the overtime period and probably win, whereas a team like Buffalo just doens't have the size or talent to open up a can of domination and shut down a game, and really has to fight for everything they get. They aren't, at all, playing for the tie, they're playing for the win, they're just fighting an uphill battle. While those teams tend to win in overtime because of the extra space the four on four provides (which helps to kill the trap dead), they can still be massacred by a one line team because, under the cap system, they just don't have the guns to match the other team's top line talent.

I dunno, I don't want to mess with the points that much. Fix the schedule, get Stefan Liv in the NHL, and change the Sabres uniform to get rid of the slug. After that, I think the NHL will be the best it's been in years.

[The Sultan of Swank]

Oh c'mon, you don't like the electric Bison? Despite the fact that the team name is the Sabres and not the Buffalo?

I don't want the point system to change, we're not some sort of soccer on ice(although Crosby could argue otherwise with the way he dives).