Jun 1st, 2013
11:46AM UTC

SNN Predicts: 2013 NHL Conference Finals

Allegedly on time!

Doogie (June 8): So I finally found a few minutes to get in here. I’m not going to add reasoning to my picks because it’d a) be rubbing it in, and b) look like post hoc justifications. Nor will I try to defend that Rangers pick in round two with anything other than, “I was sick and wasn’t thinking.” So I’ll just add all the pretty history tables then peace out. Also, Gerard, you forgot that time Vancouver went to the Finals in 2011 despite your insistence that someone/something fuck them. Just sayin’.

Gerard (June 8): Nope. Take a look. I picked against Vancouver that year (and every other year) but I only started with “Fuck Vancouver. That’s why,” last season.

Doogie (June 9): Shit. You’re right. Objection withdrawn.

The big story coming out of the last round is the great success of “Because Fuck Vancouver, that’s why.” Perfect since its inception. Other than that, I’m awesome and Doogie still seems to think that the Rangers are an above-par team. I think Matt’s finally put away the dice.  So, without delay, here’s this round’s predictions!  I’m not going to do the typical Doogie thing of digging into teams’ pasts, because, well, I’m lazy.  But! Things will be up on time, and that’s got to count for something, right? Some justifications will likely be put into this over the next few days.

Doogie Gerard Matt Result
4-2 4-3 4-2 4-3
4-2 4-0 4-1 4-3
4-2 4-1 4-2 4-1
4-3 4-2 4-3 4-1
2-2 3-1 3-1 W-L
11 10 10 GO
0 1 0 PS
9-3 10-2 9-3 W-L
24 19 24 GO
2 4 1 PS

In the interests of fairness, I’m going to retire “Because Fuck Vancouver. That’s why,” for the year since all three of the teams are in the final four. [Ed: (after game 1): I apparently really should have picked the Bruins to win though...]. The universe does not seem to hate Toronto as much as it does Vancouver (I know – it surprised me too), so that tag gets scrapped for next year.

And here come the picks.

Clarence Campbell Conference Finals

(1) Chicago vs. (5) Los Angeles

Playoff History: The Hawks and Kings have only met once in the playoffs, nearly forty years ago.

1974 QF

Doogie Says: Leaning Chicago in six.

Gerard Says: Hawks in 6.

Matt Says: Either way, I think these teams are going to be tired…and that’s gonna lead to some mistakes. Hawks in 5.

2 4 1 3 3
1 2 3 2 1

Prince of Wales Conference Finals

(1) Pittsburgh vs. (4) Boston

Playoff History: The Pens and Bruins met in back-to-back Wales Conference Finals in the early ’90s, series that changed the course of Cam Neely’s career. There were series before that, but no one cares because the Penguins were a joke and the Bruins were not, in those days. (Though apparently, the Bruins’ 1979 sweep of the Pens was the last time the Pens had been swept. Spoilers.)

1979 QF 1980 PRE 1991 CF 1992 CF
4-0 3-2 4-2 4-0

Doogie Says: Leaning Boston in six.

Gerard Says: Pens in 6.

Matt Says: Part of me wants Pittsburgh to go on and get Iginla the Cup just so I can point out how it didn’t even take him a full season to get one now that he’s not saddled with the Flames [Ed: Says the Avs fan. Poor Nordiques.], but of the few games in the series I saw, I still think Boston has the better shot. Not that the Penguins won’t put up a fight, but I’m questioning that the last two Pens games were anything but a fluke on their part, the bears will take it in 6.

PIT 0 1 1 0 0
BOS 3 6 2 1 4
Be Sociable, Share!

Tags: , , , , ,

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.


8 Responses to “SNN Predicts: 2013 NHL Conference Finals”

  1. Doogie2K says:

    Hey, the Bruins barely survived Toronto. How was I know they’d remember they were the Bruins all of a sudden?

  2. Matt says:

    Yeah, I actually managed to catch enough games this time while eating supper at camp that I could make a somewhat informed decision on the outcomes (without having to do all sorts of extra-curricular activities like read blogs and look at numbers)…

    As for the Bruins, they were probably just a bit fuzzy as when bears see leaves free from the trees, they think hibernation…

  3. Doogie2K says:

    Good job, Pittsburgh. Good effort.

  4. Doogie2K says:

    And with that, everyone’s going to be tied at either 10-4 or 11-3 at the end of this round. Based on predictions, everyone’s going to be within two games off. Gerard’s four perfect series is basically the only thing that separates any of us meaningfully at this point.

    Close is fun.

  5. Ender says:

    I have no idea how the tiebreakers go. It’s PS and then games off, right?

  6. Matt says:

    Believe so, yeah. So basically, if you get this next pick right, then you win. :-P

    I have seriously no idea who to pick yet…

  7. Doogie2K says:

    I think we were going with vice versa. The likelihood is strong that we may need both. Or just declare a tie because fuck it.

    Also, re: Vancouver, I’ve apparently been lawyered. Goddammit.

  8. Ender says:

    My math may be off, but I think that if I pick the winning team in 6 games (or if we all pick the same team) I win by default.

Leave a Reply