That didn’t quite go according to plan, I don’t think.
| Doogie | Hoop | Matt | Gerard | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
|
|
|
 |
| 4-1 | 4-1 | 4-1 | 4-2 | 4-3 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
| 4-3 | 4-2 | 4-2 | 4-2 | 4-1 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| 4-2 | 4-2 | 4-1 | 4-3 | 4-2 |
 |
|
|
|
|
| 4-1 | 4-1 | 4-2 | 4-3 | 4-2 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
| 4-0 | 4-2 | 4-2 | 4-2 | 4-2 |
 |
|
|
|
|
| 4-3 | 4-2 | 4-2 | 4-0 | 4-2 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
| 4-3 | 4-1 | 4-2 | 4-3 | 4-2 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
| 4-2 | 4-1 | 4-3 | 4-2 | 4-3 |
| 5-3 | 6-2 | 4-4 | 4-4 | W-L |
| 18 | 13 | 16 | 18 | GO |
To be fair, though, I think most of the hockey world bet against Montreal, and for pretty solid reasons. Philly…man, I don’t know what the three of us were thinking. There were way too many signs there for us to ignore. Throw in a little homerism (Matt), and a couple of gutsy picks (Gerard), and you wind up with a 4-4 record pretty quickly. The winner of round one, though, as both most correct and most accurate picker, is Hoop, with six correct series and “only” 13 games off. (See this comment for an explanation of the latter.)
Apologies for the minor lateness (it’s now 2-0 3-0 3-1 Sharks midway through the first period of Game 1); in my defence, the power kind of died around here for a little bit today due to a freak spring snowstorm. Also, I didn’t expect the game to start at 5:30 local time on a weeknight. Matt and Gerard will add their explanations/justifications later, but I’m liking the variety in this round. Time to separate the men from the boys. Or the lucky from the not. Whatever.
History Has Been Made. Too bad the commercials have been thoroughly diluted by parodies of variable quality and questionable decisions on which plays to showcase.
Eastern Conference Semifinals
(4) Pittsburgh vs. (8) Montreal
Playoff History: The Canadiens upset the Penguins, who still had Jagr in his prime leading a pretty solid lineup, in 1998, their only meeting to date.
| 1998 CQF |
|---|
|
| 4-2 |
Season Series: 3-1 Pittsburgh.
Doogie Says: I’ve said this a couple of times now, but while there were good reasons to believe Washington was going to roll Montreal pretty easily, there were also good reasons why that didn’t happen, good reasons that really don’t apply to this series. For one, the Caps tend to ditch the gameplan and try to do everything themselves when adversity rears its head, something the Pens don’t do. This makes it possible for a good positional team to weather the storm, limit opportunities by pushing them to the outside, and make hay on the counterattack, where the Caps are somewhat weak in their own zone. Again, not so the Penguins, who will continue to attack the middle like a Stanley Cup champion and who have a full defensive commitment from the entire lineup (see Crosby yanking a puck off the goal line in Game 2 against Ottawa). Jaro and the mini-Halaks will probably continue to get in the way of a couple thousand shots, and that will probably produce a tighter series than one would expect from the paper teams, but I don’t think this is a run that has legs, unless Halak would care to repeat that .978 SVP he put up in his last three games. Penguins in six.
Hoop Says: The Canadiens pulled off the shocker of the decade.. err century… err I dunno it’s been a while since there has been a bigger shocker. But lets be realistic, the Penguins are a better team than the Caps from front to back, and that is the difference. Been a fun ride Les Habitants! Penguins in 5.
Matt Says: Penguins in six.
Gerard Says: Canadiens in six.
|
6 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
|
3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 4 |
(6) Boston vs. (7) Philadelphia
Playoff History: The Big Bad Bruins and the Broad Street Bullies waged war repeatedly through the mid- to late-70s, once for all the marbles and three times for the right to get spanked by the Canadiens. Somehow, they’ve yet to meet since.
| 1974 SCF | 1976 SF | 1977 SF | 1978 SF |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| 4-2 | 4-1 | 4-0 | 4-1 |
Season Series: 2-1-1 for each team.
Doogie Says: I said in Round 1 that if Rask could get enough goal support, the Bruins might be able to put together a decent run. I didn’t think that would happen against Buffalo, but now that Marc Savard is back, and the B’s are facing another injury-depleted team, I think I’m beginning to believe. True, the Flyers dealt with another offensively-inept team in New Jersey last round pretty handily, but then the Devils aren’t built for war the way they used to be: say what you will about the Bruins, they’re always built for war, so physicality probably isn’t going to be a huge advantage for either team. In the end, I think it comes down to whether the Flyers’ depth can solve Rask (Dan Carcillo had two goals in the last series), and whether Brian Boucher turns back into a pumpkin at some point in this series. I think we’re gonna get a hell of a series, but in the end, Rask proves to be the difference in a long one. Bruins in seven.
Hoop Says: Boston showed a good team game that I suspected they would in round 1. Philly however walked into New Jersey and punched the Devils in the mouth. Philly has an edge up front and on the blue line. Boston has the edge in net, and I generally like picking the team with the better goaltending, however I think the Flyers could be on one of those magical rolls. Flyers in 6.
Matt Says: Bruins in six.
Gerard Says: Bruins in five.
|
5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3 |
|
4 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 4 |
Western Conference Semifinals
(1) San Jose vs. (5) Detroit
Playoff History: The Sharks made an impression in their first-ever playoff series by beating the prohibitive favourite Red Wings in seven in 1994. The Wings got their vengeance the next year, then served to fuel the fires of those claiming the Sharks can’t hack it in the playoffs by ousting them in the second round three years ago.
| 1994 CQF | 1995 CSF | 2007 CSF |
|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| 4-3 | 4-0 | 4-2 |
Season Series: 3-0-1 Detroit, with one win coming in the SO.
Doogie Says: This is actually a bit of a tough one. Part of me wants to point to San Jose’s playoff record (one conference final in eight semifinal appearances, and it was six years ago), Detroit’s playoff record (three straight appearances in the conference finals, including two wins and a Cup), and the season series record above, and call it a day. But that’s lazy, so instead I’ll justify the obvious pick of Detroit by saying that while Howard had some iffy nights against Phoenix, San Jose’s top line remains AWOL while Joe Pavelski and Ryane Clowe are leading the team in scoring, with Pavelski pulling their asses out of a fire on no fewer than two occasions last round. While some of Detroit’s depth veterans are struggling (hello, Mr. Cleary), at least the guys who get paid to be King Shit are doing precisely that (Zetterberg has 11 points in 7 games; Datsyuk has 8; their top four D all have 5 or 6 points each). Bet on the Wings to make it four trips to the Final Four in a row. Red Wings in 6.
Hoop Says: San Jose showed a lot of mental toughness in the first round, proving that this is a new team. Detroit got all it could handle from a game Phoenix squad. Realistically Phoenix should not have been able to hang with Detroit which concerns me. San Jose had every excuse to fold after the game 3 own goal in OT. These teams are very close, and I am going with the goaltender in this one. Gimme Nabokov, and the Sharks in 7.
Matt Says: Red Wings in five.
Gerard Says: Red Wings in seven.
|
4 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
|
3 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 1 |
(2) Chicago vs. (3) Vancouver
Playoff History: Oh, man, I’m really excited about this series, because of the recent history. These two clubs played a pretty entertaining (and occasionally violent) second-round series last year, capped off by a wild 7-5 Blackhawks victory. Before that, two meetings in twenty-seven years.
| 1982 CF | 1995 CSF | 2009 CSF |
|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| 4-1 | 4-0 | 4-2 |
Season Series: Tied 2-2, with each team taking a close win and each team taking a lopsided win.
Doogie Says: Last year, these two clubs put on a hell of a show, and I expect this year to be no different. Healthy, I think these are two extremely well-matched clubs, with Chicago being slightly deeper on offence and Vancouver having the better goalie. I think home ice advantage will play a big role with the matchup game, and I suspect that the continued absence of Willie Mitchell will hurt the Canucks. Their PK was awful last round, and looking at the scoring chances, VAN-LA was much closer than it looked on the scoreboard, and could conceivably have gone either way if not for LA’s goaltending letting them down. It all adds up to something that at least superficially resembles the outcome of last year’s series, though the fun part, as always, will be the journey. Blackhawks in six.
Hoop Says: In my opinion the Hawks got damned lucky to get by Nashville. Vancouver’s PK made their series with the Kings much more interesting than it should have been. Both these teams are very deep, and I think the goaltending is close. The biggest factor here is the X factor. And that is are the Hawks in Luongo’s head? I say they are. This is the series that Roberto needs to win to prove he belongs in the conversation of elite goaltenders. I don’t think he can do it. Hawks in 6.
Matt Says: Canucks in seven.
Gerard Says: Blackhawks in five.
|
1 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 5 | 4 |
|
5 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 2 |
Wow I’m out on a limb here by myself on a couple of these picks.
To be fair, so is Matt with Vancouver and Gerard with Montreal.
I’m a giant chickenshit.
Well Gerard is tanked when he makes his picks
I’m actually surprised that only Matt went with the Nucks.
And Doogie you make wonderful well thought out albeit incorrect picks LOL
Yes I am waiting for the lightning bolt from the hockey gods.
Hey, I figure if I’m going to be wrong, I might as well have a good reason, eh?
And Montreal takes a game. Suck it.
And I said they’d take two. I learned from last round.
So did I jinx the Hawks by posting Chelsea Dagger in that Hitmen post above?
Edit: Never mind.
Man who would have guessed the Sharks would be beating the Wings? Oh wait.
I’m glad I have absolutely no read on the Flyers this year. sheesh.
Best of luck to the Vancouver Canucks this post-season.
Okay, so far Gerard’s looking good for two perfect series, and can theoretically get all four perfect if the Wings win their next three and the Habs win their next two.
Very curious to see if Philly can win tonight. That series would suddenly get very interesting if they do.
You just had to go and jinx it, didn’t you?
What, you don’t like me saying “shutout?”
What kind of competitor would I be if I didn’t actively sabotage you at every point?
Boy, at this rate, Hoop’s going to go 2/2 on series that none of the rest of us picked right. What the fuck, Boston?
Is Montreal reminding anyone else of the Flames of ’04?
In some aspects, yeah, but Montreal’s getting outshot by an average of 10 shots per game. Calgary was outshot by an average of less than one shot per game. Getting outshot by a little bit probably isn’t a big deal, but ten shots per game? Yeouch.
I guess I can buy the argument that Jacques Martin knew his team was going to get killed on zone time regardless and decided to employ a rope-a-dope strategy, but other than a couple of games here and there, the scoring chances still say that they’re getting dominated, so it’s not like they’re limiting quality opportunities that much. Maybe their ratio of Corsi (shots directed at the net, shots + blocks + misses) or Fenwick (shots + misses) to scoring chances is higher than normal, meaning they really are keeping WSH/PIT in check to a degree, I dunno. I’m too lazy to check, and don’t care enough to bother, anyway. Hell, maybe Halak putting up a Hasekian save percentage was part of the plan. Whatever the case, it seems to be working thus far, and if they get by Pittsburgh tomorrow night, I’m not sure Boston or Philly have enough bodies left to survive a Montreal endurance run.
Gerard has portrayed the ’93 Canadiens as horribly lucky based on their OT record, when if anything, they probably shouldn’t have played as many OT games against lower-seeded opponents (BUF, NYI, LAK) as they did. If the 2010 Canadiens make the Stanley Cup Final, that will be a massive triumph of good fortune, in overcoming the President’s Trophy winners and the defending Stanley Cup Champions plus whomever surives the War of Attrition. If anything, the comparable would be the Anaheim Mighty Ducks of 2003, who beat, in order, the defending Cup champions (DET), the #2 overall team (DAL), and the #6 seed in their own conference (MIN) before falling in Game 7 to one of the League’s elite (NJD). That Ducks team got outshot pretty brutally, too, to the tune of 6.5 shots per game, with that ratio doubtlessly being helped by their one easy series against the Wild. Fits better than anything else I’ve seen, actually. It also means we’re probably playing Chicago in the Finals, since Jersey wasn’t the President’s Trophy winners that year (that was Ottawa, whom they beat in the conference finals), so hooray for an Original Six final. First since ’79.
Halak ’10 = Giguere ’03? The save percentages are probably similar, adjusted for era (Halak = .932; Giguere = .945). In any case, Mike Cammalleri (11 G, 16 P in 13 GP) is scoring the pants off of 2003 Petr Sykora (13 P in 21 GP) and Steve Rucchin (7 P in 21 GP) and we’re still in round two. And those Ducks were a cure for insomnia. Jesus Christ.
Bullshit. The day you find some numbers showing how many playoff OT games a regular season point difference equates to is the day I stop watching sports altogether.
The playoffs are the playoffs. The regular season doesn’t matter once you’re in. The Nordiques were the “better” team in the first round (by which I mean they outplayed MTL badly) and still ended up losing. The Sabres were the worse team in round two, but it took MTL 3 OT games to eek out a win. The Isles played comparably to the Habs, but again, lost a few in OT and it sunk them.
Then there was LA.
Montreal was outplayed in at least two of those series and most of those games. Possibly 3 series. But their longest series was 6 games. That’s luck.
As much as people bitch about how Edmonton shouldn’t have gotten to the finals, they didn’t get there on luck. Carolina, on the other hand, played only teams who had key injuries (including Edmonton) and that made the difference.
Montreal got really lucky to win the cup. Most teams do. It’s a fact of the playoff structure. But don’t give me this “they probably shouldn’t have played as many OT games against lower-seeded opponents” bullshit. You know it’s bullshit. It’s like all of the SO teams will get clobbered in playoff OT. The two concepts, while seemingly related, are not even correlated. They deal with different things under different rules.
Do you really believe Montreal and Washington would have had a 33pt difference if the Habs were in the SE and the Caps were in the NE? Of course not. It would still be an upset, but not nearly as much of one. The Pens finished in 4th place, but by points (adjusted for division) it would appear to be a bigger upset if MTL takes them.
And all of that is assuming that all other things are equal. Different divisions have varying qualities, sure, but they also have different styles. A team who is great against the NE might be horrible against the SE due entirely to coaching and playing style. Isn’t that the argument for why the habs beat the caps? Or how the Oilers beat the Red Wings, Sharks, and Ducks? Or how Calgary beat the Canucks, Red Wings and Sharks? Forget seeding. Forget regular season points. Some teams are built for the playoffs, some for the regular season, and some for both. Some coaches are built for the playoffs, as are some goalies. MacT might not be the greatest regular season coach, but he’s a very good playoff/tournament coach (for example).
Now I know that’s long and meandering, but the gist is that the regular season is the regular season and the playoffs are the playoffs. The Habs are built as an attrition machine this year, and as long as Halak keeps seeing the shots coming they have a great chance to win.
Do they look like the 04 Flames? God no. They’d need a Gelinas (or a Pisani) for that. Do they look like an ’03 Ducks? Nope. The Ducks were in so far over their heads that it was ridiculous. I’d go with the ’93 Canucks – McLean with a .928SV%
Not a bad team, not an underestimated team. Just a team that needed to be firing on all cylinders to get through.
All I meant by that comment is that those games shouldn’t have been as close as they were on the scoresheet, because Montreal was, in theory, the better team. I don’t know what the shots were (though this post says they outshot the Kings more often than not in the Final): the NHL’s stats only go back to ’98 (presumably because of the relocations), the Summary Project hasn’t gotten around to ’93 yet, and I was seven when the playoffs were on, so all I remember was the team winning and being seemingly awesome. Without game tapes or stats, not much to argue about one way or the other as to who got outplayed by whom, except our 17-year-old memories.
Yes, the playoffs are a different bird to an extent, but the regular season is the only thing you have to go on, in terms of expectations and predictions. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say the 102-point team (especially in the old system) is the better team than the 86-, 87-, and 88-point teams. And I’m not sure I’m big on the playstyle argument, either: Quebec and Buffalo were in the same division, the Isles might have been slightly better than their point total because they got beat up on by the Pens, but not by much, and if I remember correctly, wasn’t the Campbell the weaker conference outside of its elite teams back then? (LA had historically-bad SJ in the Smythe and somewhat-less-bad Edmonton in the Smythe and Tampa in the Norris to pound on during the season; how does that temper their record, versus how historically-bad Ottawa in the Adams affected MTL/BOS/QUE?) Even so, that was a playoff full of upsets in both conferences, as I recall, which does make Montreal lucky in a sense because the teams that would’ve clobbered them got taken care of for them, but that doesn’t mean they were lucky in the series they played, as such.
As for more modern applications, yes, to a certain degree, the weakness of the SE division compared to the NE would exaggerate the difference between Washington and Montreal, but probably not to the massive extent you suggest (Toronto was pretty Goddamned bad, and Boston and Ottawa were mediocre for most of the year right alongside Montreal). But if you watched those last three games, Montreal spent a lot of fucking time in their defensive zone, gave up a lot of quality scoring chances, and gave up a lot of shots. Doesn’t matter what your style is, that’s a really hard way to win consistently. Sure, we probably should’ve picked up that there could be some degree of stylistic advantage to Montreal from the regular-season record, but without seeing the games, it’s hard to say from afar whether they just had a couple of good games or if there was a good reason for them to have split the series, so you go with what you can. No regrets.
As for the shootout thing, come on. Shootouts are not real hockey: you can’t take the results in that for jack shit for the playoffs. Obviously, if there were no shootout, the incentive structure completely changes, and maybe Phoenix goes for it more (or less?) in regulation/OT and that changes the number of games that are tied past 65. And maybe if OT were unlimited and 5-on-5, as you’d see in the playoffs, they’d eventually emerge victorious more often (or less?). As it turned out, they still lost, and I don’t think they played an OT game against the Wings, so…yeah. I don’t know what else to say in that regard.
Finally, I’m not going for definitive comparisons here, because every team is obviously unique. Hoop asked if they resembled the ’04 Flames to anyone else, and I countered with the ’03 Ducks, who were a better statistical comparison (and really, the Habs may not be as in over their heads, but those are as formidable as opponents get out East). The ’94 Canucks…I dunno. Again, no game tape, few stats, I can’t offer an argument one way or the other, because I was eight, and don’t remember details from that far back. Maybe? VAN certainly dusted off their opponents much faster in that season (one seven-gamer and two fives).
Look, I realize I called you out, and I’m sorry; it was poorly phrased, I was in a rush, I was posting during work. Taking that away, I stand by my overall opinion that Montreal’s getting as much help from the bounces as they are from the goalie and the shot-blockers: how many posts did PIT hit in about five minutes in the second before MTL tied it and took the lead? And the quick whistle? The Pens could’ve easily won that one with a bit of luck on their side last night.
And all I’m saying is that expectations and predictions based on the regular season have no basis in logic, so arguing about how many OT games a team *should* have played is just horribly, horribly wrong.
However, I will agree that Montreal has had a lot of luck, but as I wrote above, luck is a factor of the playoff structure. Most teams who win the cup win (at least partially) based on luck. It’s a moot point.
And I pull the ’94 Canucks not because of stats or anything. I pull them because McLean got hot (his reg season SV% was under .900) and the rest of the team pulled together enough to get it done with some luck here and there. They weren’t a *bad* team but they made it work. The Ducks were a bad team.
Also, the next person who calls a post “luck” gets their ass kicked. There is nothing unlucky about hitting a post. the shot is off. Barely off, but off nonetheless. Luck has nothing to do with it.
Okay, maybe putting it in those terms is a bit off, but if you can’t draw insights from regular-season play, what can you?
As for posts…bad luck, bad bounces, whatever. When a puck bounces off the inside a goalie’s leg, through the five hole, off both posts, and out, it’s that thing. The odds of that happening are much smaller than the error of reproducing human movement.
Your description of the ’94 Canucks sounds a lot like a description of the ’06 Oilers: a good team that got bad goaltending through the season that suddenly became stellar once they got a bloody save in the playoffs. Yes?
Actually, yea, you’re right. They probably are more comparable with the Oilers. And in a way, so are these Habs. They did have goaltending issues all year long. But I think these Habs and those Canucks were way luckier than those Oilers.
Honestly, I don’t think you can pull much from the regular season. Sometimes one team has another’s number in the regular season and that continues to the playoffs. Sure. Sometimes the style of play in the regular season is indicative of the playoffs, sure. (The Oilers never played one particular style in ’06, so it made sense that coaching could be a real advantage for them. The ’10 Caps really only played one style, so they hit a brick wall). But points, seeding, SOW, etc? Meaningless.
And I’ll give you weird bounces off of the goalie, defense/deflections and boards, but I won’t give you posts. No way.
I think you can pull something from the season series. I think you can pull something from play with injury. I think you can pull something from the dominant style or styles of the team (another prime example are the Canucks. If the Sedins can’t get low, the whole team is screwed).
But regular season placing and points? Meh. This is why I always say Edmonton has a real shot if they just make the damn playoffs. Or at least I did while MacT was coaching. This is why Calgary, Nashville always go out in the first round. This is why Vancouver always goes out in the second. Flexibility is important in the playoffs and is not reflected in the regular season due to the amount of games played. If you’re playing 3 teams in a week you can’t exactly prepare properly.
But if the season series is even or mostly even? it really could go either way. At that point it depends to some extent on luck and to some extent which team is more ready for the series.
Also, how awesome is it that the two game 6′s were exactly 365 days apart? The Second Annual Game 6 loss to Chicago.
Does Vancouver have a Dallas?
And those Luongo quotes? Classic.
I love that quip about improving from seven to five.
Also, it’s worth pointing out that the Hitmen won their second WHL championship eleven years to the day after their first (May 7, 1999-May 7, 2010). Coincidence? Fate? Whatever, it’s neat either way.
As for everything else…I’m wearing my 1910-11 vintage replica jersey in an effort to affect the bounces from 3,000 km away, watching the game on massive tape delay. Take everything else I say with that piece of context in mind.
I’ve said it before: I’m torn on this series.
On the one hand, I want the Pens to win. On the other, I want a Habs/Bruins ECF, with an Original 6 SCF.
So I end up more or less cheering for the Habs while being ok with whoever wins.
Also, the endings of the last two games have been stressful. Here’s hoping for a fight in this one as well.
Lost in amongst all this other discussion: Hoop and I nailed the CHI-VAN series, and poor Matt went ohfer the West.
I would also be pretty happy if, by the end of the night, Gerard had nailed the East.
Edit: Pittsburgh really controlled the end of Game 5; I never felt that one was in doubt. Game 6…wow. That was a game worth watching from start to finish. Game 7 is already programmed into my DVR.
And I haven’t a clue who to pick in CHI-SJS yet. I think the season series was 3-1 CHI, but I’m not sure.
3-1 with two OT wins for CHI
Also, STEAM! PORTAL! YAY!
Oh, is Steam for Mac out today? Shit, I had no idea. Wonder which of my games are available for Mac, besides Valve’s stuff?
Re: CHI-SJS – I have no justification yet, but my instant reaction is CHI in 6. Subject to change without warning.
Only Portal is out by Valve. Some indie games like Braid are up though. And the Civ Games.
Civ is out for Mac? Really? That’s awesome. I bought the whole package for $13 over Christmas. I also have Braid and World of Goo, the latter of which I presume will be there because I know a Mac version exists.
Now I’m going to have to go look for myself…
Edit: Also, Machinarium, Torchlight, and possibly Osmos; I don’t remember if I own that or if I just thought about getting it for $2 a while back.
Yeah, if you liked the Diablos tennish years ago, Torchlight is apparently a refinement of and callback to those games, esp. Diablo I. (The lead design guys, and even the music/sound guy, are direct from old Blizz North.) Everyone I know who’s tried it has loved it, but I haven’t had a chance to get into it yet. But yeah, there it is. MAC GAMES GET!
If you weren’t already aware, BTW, Portal is free-as-in-beer until the 24th. You know, in case you were still holding out after two and a half years.
I dunno I think Steam might have to send me $5 to get me to play it. Portal = meh
Yea, I’m happy about free Portal.
I think everyone should at least try Portal, even if they ultimately end up not liking it. Plus, I find it hard to complain about free. I was meh on Borderlands, for example, but if it were free? I’m all over that shit. Unless it actively damages my computer or something, I’ll probably grab something if it’s free. (Of course, I’ve also bought several games on Steam that I already own for the convenience of not having to put a disc in anymore. Never for very much, but it was a non-zero value.)
Never underestimate the power of laziness.
Efficiency!
http://www.theprovince.com/sports/hockey/canucks-hockey/Dejected+Canucks+puts+Luongo+sale+Craigslist/3017865/story.html
I saw that earlier today. Fantastic.
I wonder if we can put Moreau up for sale?
Free to a good home? Bad home?
We’ll throw in a draft pick?
Also, how did I never notice that there’s a french version of RE: Your Brains? Brilliant.
Oh, off-topic, how we love you.
The Calgary Flames would be happy to take Roberto off your hands along with Burrows and Bernier. We’ll send you Kiprusoff, Staios, and Kotalik.
If you were smart, you’d also take Kesler. That’s fine, the Oilers will take him instead.
There’s a French version of “Re: Your Brains”? Seriously?
Well I need the cap space to re sign Ian White LOL
Yeah, that’s right, Calgary’s kind of cap-fucked right now, aren’t they?
Go Habs. Go bounces. Go David Volek.
I have a summer game plan coming out on Friday, I’ll be sure to link it up here.
Re: Vos Cerveaux
Seriously, if MTL winning isn’t enough incentive for the Bruins to take the Flyers I don’t know what is.
Oh shit, I have that on my computer, too. I was always curious what that was, but I was too lazy to actually listen to it.
In other news, “Oleeeeee, Oleeeeee, Oleeeeee, Oleeeeee! Oleeeee, ole ole oleee, Oleeeeee, Oleeeeee!” I believe those are the lyrics.