Jun 12th, 2013
2:57PM UTC

SNN Predicts: 2013 Stanley Cup Finals

Two hours early!

Doogie (2:02 AM ADT): What did I tell you? What a game.

Doogie Gerard Matt Result
4-2 4-2 4-1 4-1
4-2 4-2 4-2 4-0
2-0 1-1 2-0 W-L
3 7 2 GO
0 0 1 PS
11-3 11-3 11-3 W-L
27 26 26 GO
2 4 2 PS

So here we are, after four months of labour nonsense, a 48-game sprint, and six weeks of playoffs, we’re finally at the end of the line. After three rounds, everyone’s essentially deadlocked, with perfect series looking like it could be the final decider in what’s been the closest round of picks since we started this nonsense. Looking at this final matchup, it’s really difficult to tell who’s got the advantage here, as evidenced by our picks below, and it should turn out to be a classic regardless of the end result. Will Chicago be the first non-Detroit team to win the double in over a decade? Will the Bruins prove that there is no love left in the Universe? Tune in tonight at 9 ADT and find out!

(W1) Chicago vs. (E4) Boston

Playoff History: Not terribly exhaustive. The Original Six era was not terribly kind to either team, though Boston fared somewhat better than Chicago, and they’ve spent most of their subsequent existence in opposing conferences.

1927 QF 1942 QF 1970 SF 1974 SF 1975 PRE 1978 QF
10-5* 2-1 4-0 4-2 2-1 4-0

* – Denotes two-game, total-goals series.

Stanley Cup Finals History: The ‘Hawks were one of the punching bags of the Original Six, going sixteen years without winning a playoff series, so it’s small wonder their history isn’t as inflated as those of their cohorts (this is just their 12th appearance; only the Rangers are worse among O6 teams). In fact, since making five appearances in 13 years during the Hull-Mikita-Esposito era (1961-73), the ‘Hawks have only been back to the Finals twice in forty years. However, they did win a Stanley Cup just three years ago, snapping the second-longest Cup drought in NHL history (49 years, just shy of the Rangers’ 54). Recent victories are great deodorant in a results-oriented business.

1931 1934 1938 1944 1961 1962
2-3 3-1 3-1 0-4 4-2 2-4
1965 1971 1973 1992 2010
3-4 3-4 2-4 0-4 4-2

The Bruins and the Flyers have always been grouped together because they like to cultivate reputations as tough teams, but they have another amusing thing in common: a lengthy history as Stanley Cup bridesmaids. The Bruins have won just six of their eighteen Cup Finals over nearly ninety years, while the Flyers have won two of eight in forty-odd years. Like the ‘Hawks, though, the Bruins do have a recent Cup: the one after Chicago’s, in fact, erasing a similarly-long drought (39 years). Also, this is the second-last Original Six matchup that had yet to happen in the Finals; the last will be New York-Chicago. Hardly surprising, really: the Rangers, Hawks, and Bruins, in order, had the worst fortunes of the O6 era.

1927 1929 1930 1939 1941 1943 1946 1953 1957
0-2 2-0 0-2 4-1 4-0 0-4 1-4 1-4 1-4
1958 1970 1972 1974 1977 1978 1988 1990 2011
2-4 4-0 4-2 2-4 0-4 2-4 0-4 1-4 4-3

Season Series: You’re shitting me, right?

Doogie Says: I am sorely tempted to borrow from Matt and take one of my laundry quarters and flip that thing because fuck, I dunno. I can’t go to my usual bit and lean on the fancystats because the teams played in two different leagues this year, so I just kind of have to eyeball it. Bruins have the better goalie and #1 D; Chicago has the better rest-of-the-D-corps and the forwards are kind of a wash. Chicago had greater regular-season success in the better league, Rask is outperforming his career numbers slightly more than Corey Crawford…eh, let’s say the coin landed on the head and not the wild animal. ‘Hawks in seven, though if it goes the other way I will not be shocked in the slightest.

Gerard Says: This really could go either way. On the one hand, Rask is really good. On the other, so is Chicago’s offense. Sure, Quick let in a couple of softies, but who doesn’t? This series is going to come down to Rask, I think. Hawks in 6.

Matt Says: I’ve been thinking on this in my free time here, and I don’t think I’ve come to a solid conclusion yet. I’m happy with either team taking it. If I flip a coin, it’s likely to land on its edge [Ed: Well, shit, there goes that idea.]. I do agree with Gerard when he says it’s going to come down to Rask. But, and I hope I’m right, it’s going to go the other way because of him. Bears in 6. [Ed: Who?]

4 1 0 6 3 3 4
3 2 2 5 1 2 2
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.


13 Responses to “SNN Predicts: 2013 Stanley Cup Finals”

  1. Doogie2K says:

    Game-theorizing for a sec here, if the Hawks win in seven, I tie Gerard on wins (12) and games off, lose on perfect series 4-3. If they win in six, I tie Gerard on wins (12), lose on both games off (-2) and perfect series (5-2). If they win in four or five, I tie Gerard on wins (12), and lose on both games off (-2) and perfect series (4-2). If the Bruins win, Matt wins, full stop. Unless Gerard and I gang up and vote that a different primary criterion be used to crown the winner, of course. ;)

    All of which is to say, there is literally no way I can win this now. Good job, Gerard. I mean, I suppose I could change my pick to the Bruins just to spite Matt, but meh.

  2. Ender says:

    How does 19+3 = 26? Oh well. Either way, it comes down to me or Matt.

  3. Doogie2K says:

    It doesn’t. I don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. 13+11+3=27; 9+10+7=26; 14+10+2=26.

  4. Ender says:

    How did I get 7 last round? I’m counting 3.

  5. Doogie2K says:

    You had the Penguins. That puts you a wee bit behind.

  6. Doogie2K says:

    52:08. Fifth longest all time. Wow.

  7. Ender says:

    Ok, I don’t know the magic formula then. Oh well. I’m still up one game on Matt.

  8. Doogie2K says:

    It’s based on games won by BOTH teams. You had Pens in six. Logically, this is much less accurate than Bruins in six would’ve been, yes? So that has to be reflected.

    PIT: You predicted they’d win four, they won zero. That’s four.
    BOS: You predicted they’d win two, they won four. That’s two more. Total is six.

    Thus how, in years where someone goes 6-8, the number of games-off is somewhere north of 40.

  9. Matt says:

    Bruins…Bears…whichever, I was spending time watching the old Bruins bear commercials on Youtube…

  10. Matt says:

    Well, there goes my game number prediction…

  11. Matt says:

    And to the bottom of the rankings I go…

  12. Ender says:

    Suck it, bitches.

  13. Doogie2K says:

    11-4 would’ve won or tied any other year, I think. Holy shit. Was this year just super predictable or did we just get really lucky?

    Also, congrats to the winner, etc. Though it turns out my picks would’ve likely won my NB lab’s pool had I been in it.

Leave a Reply