Stanley Cup Final - Chicago vs. Philadelphia

[playmaker26]

Having experienced the exact same thing (the quote game) after the Habs-Penguins series, I have to say, that's weak AJB86!

That's because you quoted someone's wrong prediction and essentially called them an idiot when you didn't even make a prediction yourself.

[playmaker26]

Well I'll man up and admit that I was wrong about the Flyers, I thought the Hawks would blow thru them in 4 games (or 5 at the most) and instead they played a tough series and never gave up. Frankly I'm scared to be stuck in the same conference with them with the way that team is built, when you can get scoring across 3 lines, physical play from the whole team and shut down D you're gonna have a lot of success. Kudos for their great run this year.

But again, the orange colored glasses are clouding some visions here I think. The Hawks simply outplayed the Flyers for the better part of the series and dominated when it mattered most and that's why they're the Stanley Cup champions. You guys can make whatever arguments you want for why the Flyers 'shoulda' won but you're not convincing anyone but yourselves I don't think...and that's totally fine, its impossible to be unbiased when you passionately live and die by a team. To this day I STILL think the Habs shoulda beaten the Flames in '89 but it doesn't change the end result, the Habs lost in 6, just like this series.

To borrow a little from boxing I'll score the series like a boxing match:

Game 1: Hawks 10 - 9
Game 2: Hawks 10 - 8
Game 3: Flyers 10 - 9
Game 4: Flyers 10 - 8
Game 5: Hawks 10 - 7
Game 6: Hawks 10 - 8

Hawks 57 - Flyers 52

I sure hope I'm not someone you think is viewing this series with orange colored glasses.

The Blackhawks didn't outplay the Flyers for the better part of the series. It could have been 3-1 Flyers after 4 games. The first 4 games were dead even. Game 5 was a dominating performance by Chicago. Game 6 was carried by Chicago but it was not complete domination. They did deserve to win but the chances were closer than the shots on goal.

[playmaker26]

The thing is there is not a Flyer's fan on here trying to say the Flyers were the better team or that they should have won. Everyone agrees the Hawks were the better team. All the Flyer's fans are saying and have been saying is that the difference was not nearly as big as it was made out to be and I think that was proved by a very tight series.

I take issue with Mcgoo's posts more than any other poster on here but he gains mad respect from me for stepping up and admitting he was wrong about the Flyer's.

For another poster, maybe if you don't want to be quoted you should admit when you grossly underestimated a team and continued to throughout the entire series. Go ahead and quote me good luck finding a single post that was egriegously wrong as several of yours.

I don't think there is a more perfect post than this one. Well said. On every topic you covered.

[mister_mcgoo]

I sure hope I'm not someone you think is viewing this series with orange colored glasses.

The Blackhawks didn't outplay the Flyers for the better part of the series. It could have been 3-1 Flyers after 4 games. The first 4 games were dead even. Game 5 was a dominating performance by Chicago. Game 6 was carried by Chicago but it was not complete domination. They did deserve to win but the chances were closer than the shots on goal.

you obviously didn't read the boxing scores carefully, I had them dead even after 4 games! You might think those 4 games were all effectively 10-10 draws but I don't think that makes much sense as an analogy when no game can end in a tie. Game 5 I have scored 10-7 since the Hawks owned that game start to finish. Game 6 I have scored 10-8 since the Hawks completely took that game up until about mid way thru the 3rd when the Flyers really turned it on.

You say it 'could have been 3-1 Flyers after 4', I would argue it could equally be 3-1 Hawks and they woulda won the cup in Chicago

[playmaker26]

Well I hope you don't see me as a 'bandwagon' fan, the Hawks are my favorite orig 6 team outside the Habs and I really like the players on this latest incarnation (Toews, Keith, etc) so I was happy to cheer for them and see them win. But as to the other stuff remember you're seeing this thru Flyers eyes so what you perceive as a 'lack of respect' is simply non-fans seeing it perhaps a bit more dispassionately and objectively. I looked at this matchup as the Flyers being big underdogs for serveral reasons (though as I've noted, they played much better than I ever expected), I thought end to end CHI was just a better team on every dimension, I thought Philly played weaker teams to get to the finals, I didn't trust their goalies, they had a couple key injuries and most of all they were a 7th seed and 15th overall

That last point was of particular interest to me, especially in light of all the bravado so I crunched all the numbers and laid a small wager with my sportsbook. Since the league began sending 16 teams to the playoffs in 1980 there has NEVER been a 7th seed win, in fact:

-the lowest seed to ever to win the Cup was in 1995 - NJ (6th in conference, 10th overall). Though I put a big asterix next to that since it was the half-season lockout that year.
-after that the breakdown is pretty clear cut:

5th seeds - 1
4th seeds - 5
3rd seeds - 3
2nd seeds - 8
1st seeds - 12

in fact the average conference seed for a Cup winner is 2.26, the average overall seed for a Cup winner is 3.53. Teams that finish near the bottom of the pack in the regular season might make it to the finals, but they never win, at least not in the first 30 years.



Not at all, you're entitled to whatever opinion you wish to advance, I just don't understand what you are trying to accomplish at this point? The outcome is clear, its over and you're still bent outta shape with us because you feel we didn't show your team enough 'love' or something? I dunno what more you expect but most of the posts I've read in this thread have given credit where due for how well Philly did play but it doesn't follow that we're all going to recant our original positions that CHI was the superior team, esp as the writing is now on the wall and the Hawks have been crowned champs

What he is trying to accomplish is you stop saying that our opinions are just based on that we are Flyers fans. Yes, Chicago was the better team as a lot of us have said over and over again. But the teams were evenly matched.

I don't buy the 7th seed talk either because of the expectations this team had at the beginning of the season. They finally played to their potential. And that potential was the ability to compete for the Cup.

The Flyers didn't just play well (for 4 games). They were a good team.

[mister_mcgoo]

What he is trying to accomplish is you stop saying that our opinions are just based on that we are Flyers fans. Yes, Chicago was the better team as a lot of us have said over and over again. But the teams were evenly matched.

I don't buy the 7th seed talk either because of the expectations this team had at the beginning of the season. They finally played to their potential. And that potential was the ability to compete for the Cup.

The Flyers didn't just play well (for 4 games). They were a good team.

well then please, tell us what it is that makes you guys different, because I don't see anyone OTHER than Flyers fans arguing that it was a dead even series, so if its NOT the fact that you're homers, then what is it?

7th seed is a 7th seed, the fact that one has never once won a Cup speaks volumes, you can try to sugar coat this anyway you want to sooth the sting but it is what it is.

[fungchen3]

Well I'll man up and admit that I was wrong about the Flyers, I thought the Hawks would blow thru them in 4 games (or 5 at the most) and instead they played a tough series and never gave up. Frankly I'm scared to be stuck in the same conference with them with the way that team is built, when you can get scoring across 3 lines, physical play from the whole team and shut down D you're gonna have a lot of success. Kudos for their great run this year.

But again, the orange colored glasses are clouding some visions here I think. The Hawks simply outplayed the Flyers for the better part of the series and dominated when it mattered most and that's why they're the Stanley Cup champions. You guys can make whatever arguments you want for why the Flyers 'shoulda' won but you're not convincing anyone but yourselves I don't think...and that's totally fine, its impossible to be unbiased when you passionately live and die by a team. To this day I STILL think the Habs shoulda beaten the Flames in '89 but it doesn't change the end result, the Habs lost in 6, just like this series.

To borrow a little from boxing I'll score the series like a boxing match:

Game 1: Hawks 10 - 9
Game 2: Hawks 10 - 8
Game 3: Flyers 10 - 9
Game 4: Flyers 10 - 8
Game 5: Hawks 10 - 7
Game 6: Hawks 10 - 8

Hawks 57 - Flyers 52

I think this whole post is 100% accurate, and I am a Flyers fans.

Games 1 and 2 were very close, but the Hawks have the edge by a hair (as indicated above). Games 2 and 3, Flyers. Games 5 and 6, Hawks.

This is a great standpoint, and a very fair desription by mcgoo if you ask me.

[doulos]

You'd think I'd know better by now!

Time to stop the cycle

[duballstar014]

well then please, tell us what it is that makes you guys different, because I don't see anyone OTHER than Flyers fans arguing that it was a dead even series, so if its NOT the fact that you're homers, then what is it?

Really mcgoo? There's Flyers fans on this thread, and you and doulos. THAT'S ALL. There's no such thing as a Hawks fan on here and there's no other fans of other teams OTHER than you and doulos. So since you and doulos see what you see, apparently you make up the non-Flyers fan-base.

[Renegade]

well then please, tell us what it is that makes you guys different, because I don't see anyone OTHER than Flyers fans arguing that it was a dead even series, so if its NOT the fact that you're homers, then what is it?

7th seed is a 7th seed, the fact that one has never once won a Cup speaks volumes, you can try to sugar coat this anyway you want to sooth the sting but it is what it is.

Well let's break it down:

Game 1- Hawks-Flyers just had a shootout of all shootouts. A feeling game if you will and the skill and speed of CHI eventually took them down. Advantage: Hawks

Game 2- A concentrated effort on both sides to have a defensive game and not speed it up too much. Came down to a weak goal given up by Leighton on Eager. Advantage: Hawks

Game 3- OT game winner by Giroux. Resilience of the Flyers showed in this game. Leino's goal 20 seconds after Kane just gave the Flyers the momentuem heading into OT. Both teams had chances but Giroux stepped up due to strong play by Carle. Advantage: Flyers

Game 4- Flyers came out early and forced the pace. Bad defensive period for hawks and that late Giroux goal in the first was key. 4-1 in the third and Hawks made a great comeback to show their resilience but just wasnt happening. Advantage: Flyers

Game 5- Advantage: Hawks (I'm not talking about that game)

Game 6- Fast,Fast,Fast pace. I thought that this game was not suited for the Flyers play but they surprised me. Pronger in the box twice hurt. Buffy took advantage of that accordingly. Lots of shots in this game from Hawks and Leighton did what he had to. Give him props. Fighting back and getting good bounces were key for the flyers but when they tied it up late... They had two chances to end it before OT and failed. Game Over. Advantage: Hawks.

This was a great series. And I will defend to the death that the Flyers were well matched against Chicago. If others don't see that, then they were just listening too much to the homer announcers on NBC and everywhere else. No one gave the Flyers much hope except Buccigross and Burnside from ESPN... God bless them.

[playmaker26]

well then please, tell us what it is that makes you guys different, because I don't see anyone OTHER than Flyers fans arguing that it was a dead even series, so if its NOT the fact that you're homers, then what is it?

7th seed is a 7th seed, the fact that one has never once won a Cup speaks volumes, you can try to sugar coat this anyway you want to sooth the sting but it is what it is.

I'm not saying it was a dead even series. Like I've said, the Hawks deserved to win. Yeah, I'm really a homer when I correctly predicted the Hawks in 6. That I said the teams were evenly matched but the Hawks would win in the end.

You act like I'm not giving Chicago credit. I'm not like you that said the Flyers winning against Montreal was more of a poor effort by the Canadiens. Now that's being a homer and seeing the series through blue and red colored glasses.

[doulos]

So to summarize:

If you don't agree with playmaker then you simply must not be as smart as others at analyzing the smart.

Awesome stuff.

Does this apply to other areas of life as well?

I was thinking I could just send you a giant list of all the things I have opinions on and you could correct them for me so that I will as smart as you.

Or maybe, just maybe - and this one here is a bit of a longshot I know - I'm into crazy, over the top, lollipop and unicorn type ideas.

Maybe we just disagree and saw things differently.

Holy crap, revolutionary!

[playmaker26]

So to summarize:

If you don't agree with playmaker then you simply must not be as smart as others at analyzing the smart.

Awesome stuff.

Does this apply to other areas of life as well?

I was thinking I could just send you a giant list of all the things I have opinions on and you could correct them for me so that I will as smart as you.

Or maybe, just maybe - and this one here is a bit of a longshot I know - I'm into crazy, over the top, lollipop and unicorn type ideas.

Maybe we just disagree and saw things differently.

Holy crap, revolutionary!

Haha yeah, exactly what I'm saying...

[mister_mcgoo]

Really mcgoo? There's Flyers fans on this thread, and you and doulos. THAT'S ALL. There's no such thing as a Hawks fan on here and there's no other fans of other teams OTHER than you and doulos. So since you and doulos see what you see, apparently you make up the non-Flyers fan-base.

whats that stench?

kinda smells like bullshit though it could equally be horseshit, I'm a city boy so I can't distinguish...

Ballsakic, TML, Big_Ev, Bomm Bastic, The Comish, Deaner, Zorro, Habs27, newper, mapletreemarty, lockedge, wpggrown, rainmaker,reeveta, karlm13, praba...and that's just the last few pages of posts, NOT Flyers fans. The point you were supposed to take away from this discussion dub was that you guys are all united in your take on it and that's to be expected but no one else sees it in quite that way...that's not to say they all agree with me by any stretch but I haven't seen any of them going as far overboard as you guys.

[mister_mcgoo]

I'm not saying it was a dead even series. Like I've said, the Hawks deserved to win. Yeah, I'm really a homer when I correctly predicted the Hawks in 6. That I said the teams were evenly matched but the Hawks would win in the end.

You act like I'm not giving Chicago credit. I'm not like you that said the Flyers winning against Montreal was more of a poor effort by the Canadiens. Now that's being a homer and seeing the series through blue and red colored glasses.

dude I could care less if you give the Hawks credit or not, you see it differently than most folks, that's fine, I get it.

and please don't put words in my mouth, all I said regarding the Habs was that they played poorly in that series compared to the first two they played and that the Flyers looked weaker than they had in their previous 2 rounds. Given the Habs poorer play and the emotional high the Flyers were coming off of I woulda expected it to be 5-0 every night but it wasn't. The only point I was trying to make was that they looked to be coasting thru that series a bit, probably because they could, and I was questioning if they'd be ready for the Hawks. Seems to me they were and played as well as could be expected of them, they just ran into a better team