That is all.

• Games vs. VAN: 2 GP, 1-1-0, +6/-6, 6.00 GPG, no games with fewer than five total goals.
• All other games: 7 GP, 3-1-3, +10/-7, 2.43 GPG, no games with more than three total goals.

Khabibulin for Vezina.

10/9	10/13	10/15	10/17	10/18	10/20	10/22	10/25
1-1	1-1	3-4	2-1	1-2	1-1	2-0	3-2

If your answer was, “all the games not against Vancouver were bizarrely low-scoring,” give yourself five Internet points. In their two games, the Oilers and Canucks have combined for 12 goals, which is about average for the post-lockout NHL. In the other six games, the Oilers and their opponents have combined for just 14.

Usual caveats regarding sample size apply, of course, but I thought I’d point it out anyway.

My first thought was, of course, do their brains even function? My reasoning was that, since sex hormones are regulated by the pituitary gland, you’d need some sort of neural stimulation to the hypothalamus to get them going, right? Especially since the first step of arousal is most likely going to be neurological: pheromones, touch, visuals, etc. But then I wondered, was it possible for spinal/hindbrain mechanisms alone to produce at least some form of arousal? Is it even ethically possible to test for that? (Cue someone linking me to a news story about collecting sperm from a braindead patient so his wife can bear his children.) And would a zombie’s autonomous systems still function?

But then I realized, wait a minute, hormone production is also tied into a bunch of receptor-mediated negative-feedback loops. Too little testosterone? Brew up some gonadotropins and get this party started. Problem is, you’d need blood flow to the pituitary to know that you need it, and blood flow back to the gonads to make the magic happen. So even if the zombie had enough neural function to recognize a sexual opportunity instinctively, without a heartbeat, he’s still screwed. Or not, as the case may be.

(At this point, Julie interjected and wondered if the zombie could just apply a vibrator to his girlfriend. Theoretically, sure, but would he have the higher cognitive function to think of and apply the idea, never mind get anything out of it, make it worth his while? More likely, she’d have to do all the heavy lifting on that one, as it were.)

Of course, we’re not done yet, because we can have heartbeat without cognitive function, or indeed any neural function at all, at least in theory. The sinoatrial and atrioventricular nodes of the heart are capable of generating pacemaker potential in the absence of any sort of external stimulation, thus giving us heartbeat and blood flow without the need for a functioning nervous system. But then we return to the initial problem of erogenous signal transduction: that is, how does the zombie know when it’s sexytime? And how does the zombie “git ‘er dun,” so to speak? You’d need at least some nervous function to shuffle and eat brains, never mind perform any sort of sexual act; gotta stimulate those muscles, right? So without at least some form of nervous system, you’re again SOL.

Thus, we reach the conclusion that in order for a zombie to be able to have sex, he’d need to have at least partially-functioning nervous and cardiovascular systems (and presumably some kind of metabolic function to provide enough energy to drive all these actions and keep hormones in fresh supply, or at least process all the eaten brains and what-not). All of which raises the larger question: at what point is a zombie no longer a zombie? Or put another way, are there any different kinds of zombies that are capable of all this, while retaining their intrinsic zombie nature? (The conclusion of Shaun of the Dead springs to mind here.) The classical reanimated dead zombies of Romero et al. probably have nothing, but the 28 Days Later/Resident Evil virus zombies? Different story, potentially. Voodoo zombies? Different again. And what about consent? Can zombies give or receive consent? Would it be rape? Necrophilia? Would a human be into that? (Silly question; humans will fuck anything.) Do zombies even want to have sex? Do they carry the same reproductive drive as regular humans? Can zombies reproduce? If they can get it up and make it work, can they produce little zombie gametes, too? Would they be compatible with human gametes? Create half-undead children? Would they even want humans, or only other zombies? Is there such a thing as life-ism?

At this point, it seems clear to me that additional research will be required on my part, on the matters of zombie physiology, the minimum neurological requirements for sexual function, and perhaps even a little zombie psychology and philosophy.

Disclaimer: Any errors in physiology are entirely my own. If you’ve found this article, you probably know where to find me and yell at me for being so stupid. Though also consider the purpose of this article; chances are, I’m already taking this way more seriously than you are.

The companion ex-Oilers post can be found here.

Player	Team	Acquired	Departed
Francois Beauchemin		Draft (3/75, ’98)	Waivers (CBJ, ’04)
Kyle Chipchura		Draft (1/18, ’04)	Trade (ANA, ’09): for 4/??? ’11
Dan Ellis		Trade (NSH, ’10): with D. Boyd for S. Kostitsyn	FA (TBL, ’10)
Saku Koivu		Draft (1/21, ’93)	FA (ANA, ’09)
Brett Festerling1		Trade (ANA, ’10): with 5/??? ’12 for M. Lapierre	Trade (ATL, ’11): for D. MacIntyre
Ron Hainsey		Draft (1/13, ’00)	Waivers (CBJ, ’05)
Mark Recchi		Trade (PHI, ’95): with 3/74 ’95 (M. Hohenberger) for E. Desjardins, G. Dionne, and J. LeClair	Trade (PHI, ’99): for D. Zubrus, 2/58 ’99 (M. Carkner) and 6/172 ’00 (S. Selig)
Michael Ryder		Draft (8/216, ’98)	FA (BOS, ’08)
Craig Conroy1		Draft (6/123, ’90)	Trade (STL, ’96): with P. Turgeon and R. Fitzpatrick for M. Baron, S. Corson, and 5/122 ’97 (G. Razin)
Tom Kostopoulos		FA (LAK, ’07)	FA (CAR, ’09)
Raitis Ivanans1		FA (AHL, ’04)	FA (LAK, ’06)
Alex Tanguay1		Trade (CGY, ’08): with 5/138 ’08 (M. Trunev) for 1/25 ’08 (G. Nemisz) and 2/49 ’09 (S. Elliott, COL)	FA (TBL, ’09)
Shawn Belle1		Trade (MIN, ’08): for C. Locke	FA (EDM, ’10)
Ryan O’Byrne		Draft (3/79, ’03)	Trade (COL, ’10): for M. Bournival
Mathieu Garon		Draft (2/44, ’96)	Trade (LAK, ’04): with 3/95 ’04 (P. Baier) for R. Bonk and C. Huet
Craig Rivet1		Draft (3/68, ’92)	Trade (SJS, ’07): with 5/146 ’08 (J. Demers) for J. Gorges and 1/22 ’07 (M. Pacioretty)
Mike Ribiero		Draft (2/45, ’98)	Trade (DAL, ’06): with 6/176 ’08 (M. Tassone) for J. Niinimaa and 5/142 ’07 (A. Conboy)
Stephane Robidas		Draft (7/164, ’95)	Waivers (ATL, ’02)
Doug Janik1		Trade (DAL, ’09): for S. Begin	FA (DET, ’09)
Sheldon Souray1		Trade (NJD, ’00): with J. DeWolf and 2/61 ’01 (A. Holmqvist, TBL) for V. Malakhov	FA (EDM, ’07)
Sergei Samsonov		FA (EDM, ’06)	Trade (CHI, ’07): for J. Cullimore and T. Salmelainen
Tomas Vokoun		Draft (9/226, ’94)	Expansion Draft (NSH, ’98)
Guillaume Latendresse		Draft (2/45, ’05)	Trade (MIN, ’09): for B. Pouliot
Jose Theodore		Draft (2/44, ’94)	Trade (COL, ’06): for D. Aebischer
Paul Mara		FA (NYR, ’09)	FA (ANA, ’10)
Steve Begin1		Waivers (BUF, ’03)	Trade (DAL, ’09): for D. Janik
Francis Bouillon1		FA (IHL, ’98)	Waivers (NSH, ’02)
		Waivers (NSH, ’02)	FA (NSH, ’09)
Sergei Kostitsyn		Draft (7/200, ’05)	Trade (NSH, ’10): for D. Boyd, D. Ellis
Dainius Zubrus		Trade (PHI, ’99): with 2/58 ’99 (M. Carkner) and 6/172 ’00 (S. Selig) for M. Recchi	Trade (WSH, ’01): with T. Linden and 2/61 ’01 (A. Holmqvist, TBL) for R. Zednik, J. Bulis, and 1/25 ’01 (A. Perezhogin)
Mark Streit1		Draft (9/262, ’04)	FA (NYI, ’08)
Ryan McDonagh		Draft (1/12, ’07)	Trade (NYR, ’09): with C. Higgins and P. Valentenko for S. Gomez, T. Pyatt, and M. Busto
Matt Carkner		Draft (2/58, ’99)	FA (SJS, ’01)
Corey Locke		Draft (4/113, ’03)	Trade (MIN, ’08): for S. Belle
Michael Leighton1		Waivers (PHI, ’07)	Trade (CAR, ’07): for 7/192 ’07 (S. Kishel)
Alexei Kovalev		Trade (NYR, ’04): for J. Balej and 2/51 ’04 (B. Graham)	FA (OTT, ’09)
Matt d’Agostini		Draft (6/190, ’05)	Trade (STL, ’10): for A. Palushaj
Jaroslav Halak		Draft (9/271, ’03)	Trade (STL, ’10): for L. Eller and I. Schultz
Marc-Andre Bergeron		FA (MIN, ’09)	FA (TBL, ’11)
Brett Clark		Draft (6/154, ’96)	Expansion Draft (ATL, ’99)
Cédrick Desjardins1		FA (QMJHL, ’06)	Trade (TBL, ’10): for K. Rammo
Dominic Moore		Trade (FLA, ’10): for 2/?? ’11	FA (TBL, ’10)
Mikhail Grabovski		Draft (5/150, ’04)	Trade (TOR, ’08): for G. Pateryn and 2/32 ’10 (J. Knight, BOS)
Mike Komisarek		Draft (1/7, ’01)	FA (TOR, ’09)
Christopher Higgins		Draft (1/14, ’02)	Trade (NYR, ’09): with R. McDonagh and P. Valentenko for S. Gomez, T. Pyatt, and M. Busto
Maxim Lapierre		Draft (2/61, ’03)	Trade (ANA, ’10): for B. Festerling and 5/??? ’12

¹ Not currently on active roster.

The current distribution, as of the trade deadline:

• 3 teams have four (ANA, CGY, TBL)
• 1 teams has three (NSH)
• 11 teams have two (ATL, BOS, COL, CBJ, DAL, FLA, MIN, OTT, STL, TOR, VAN)
• 8 teams have one (DET, EDM, MTL, NJD, NYR, NYI, PHI, PIT)
• 7 teams have none (BUF, CAR, CHI, LAK, PHX, SJS, WAS)

Whereas the Oilers had a ton of teams with just one ex, the Habs have a ton of teams with two and a bunch more with none. I could be more insightful, but since this post is four months late, I’d rather just kick it out the door and put actual thought in come October.

The companion list of ex-Habs can be found here.

Player	Team	Acquired	Departed
Josh Green1		Trade (NYI, ’00): with E. Brewer for 2/35 ’00 (B. Winchester) for R. Hamrlik	Trade (NYR, ’02): for future considerations
Todd Marchant		Trade (NYR, ’94): for C. MacTavish	FA (CBJ, ’03)
Lubomir Visnovsky		Trade (LAK, ’08): for M. Greene and J. Stoll	Trade (ANA, ’10): for R. Whitney and 6/162 ’10 (B. Davidson)
Brad Winchester		Draft (2/35, ’00)	FA (DAL, ’07)
Radek Dvorak		Trade (NYR, ’03): with C. Cross for A. Carter and A. Pisa	FA (STL, ’06)
Rob Schremp		Draft (1/25, ’04)	Waivers (NYI, ’09)
Tim Thomas		FA (SM-L, ’98)	FA (IHL, ’99)
Mike Grier		Trade (STL, ’95): with C. Joseph for S. Corson2	Trade (WSH, ’02): for 2/53 ’03 (E. Tunik, NYI) and 3/94 ’03 (Z. Stortini)
Jochen Hecht		Trade (STL, ’01): with M. Reasoner and J. Horacek for D. Weight and M. Riesen	Trade (BUF, ’02): for 2/31 ’02 (J. Deslauriers) and 2/36 ’02 (J. Stoll)
Curtis Glencross		Trade (CBJ, ’08): for D. Tarnstrom	FA (CGY, ’08)
Ales Kotalik1		Trade (BUF, ’09): for 2/58 ’09 (J. Blacker, TOR)	FA (NYR, ’09)
Steve Staios		FA (ATL, ’01)	Trade (CGY, ’10): for A. Johnson and 3/?? ’11
Troy Bodie		Draft (9/278, ’03)	FA (ANA, ’08)
Erik Cole		Trade (CAR, ’08): for J. Pitkanen	Trade (CAR, ’09): with 5/131 ’09 (M. Kennedy) for P. O’Sullivan and 2/58 ’09 (J. Blacker, TOR)
Joni Pitkanen		Trade (PHI, ’07): with G. Sanderson and 3/82 (C. Abney) for J. Lupul and J. Smith	Trade (CAR, ’08): for E. Cole
Fernando Pisani		Draft (8/195, ’96)	FA (CHI, ’10)
Shawn Belle1		FA (MTL, ’10)	Trade (COL, ’11): for K. Montgomery
Mathieu Garon		FA (LAK, ’07)	Trade (PIT, ’09): for D. Sabourin, R. Stone, and 4/??? ’11
Jan Hejda		Trade (BUF, ’06) for 7/187 ’07 (N. Eno)	FA (CBJ, ’07)
Ethan Moreau1		Trade (CHI, ’99): with D. Cleary, C. Kilger, and C. Laflamme for B. Mironov, D. McAmmond, and J. Elofsson	Waivers (CBJ, ’10)
Toby Petersen		FA (PIT, ’04)	FA (DAL, ’07)
Jeff Woywitka		Trade (PHI, ’03): with 1/25 ’04 (R. Schremp) and 3/81 ’05 (D. Syvret) for M. Comrie	Trade (STL, ’05): with E. Brewer and D. Lynch for C. Pronger
Daniel Cleary		Trade (CHI, ’99): with C. Kilger, E. Moreau, and C. Laflamme for B. Mironov, D. McAmmond, and J. Elofsson	FA (PHX, ’03)
Steve MacIntyre		Waivers (FLA, ’08)	Waivers (FLA, ’09)
Marty Reasoner		Trade (STL, ’01): with J. Hecht and J. Horacek for D. Weight and M. Riesen	Trade (BOS, ’06): with Y. Stastny and 2/50 ’06 (M. Lucic) for S. Samsonov
		FA (BOS, ’06)	FA (ATL, ’08)
Sergei Samsonov		Trade (BOS, ’06): for M. Reasoner, Y. Stastny, 2/50 ’06 (M. Lucic)	FA (MTL, ’06)
Matt Greene		Draft (2/44, ’02)	Trade (LAK, ’08): with J. Stoll for L. Visnovsky
Dustin Penner		RFA (ANA, ’07): for 1/12 ’08 (T. Myers, BUF), 2/43 ’08 (J. Schultz), and 3/73 ’08 (K. Petrov, NYI)	Trade (LAK, ’11): for C. Teubert, 1/?? ’11, and conditional pick (3/?? ’12, becomes 2/?? ’12 if LA wins Cup)
Ryan Smyth		Draft (1/6, ’94)	Trade (NYI, ’07): for R. O’Marra, R. Nilsson, and 1/15 ’07 (A. Plante)
Jarret Stoll		Draft (2/36, ’02)	Trade (LAK, ’08): with M. Greene for L. Visnovsky
Kyle Brodziak		Draft (7/214, ’03)	Trade (MIN, ’09): with 6/161 ’09 (D. Kuemper) for 4/99 ’09 (K. Bigos) and 5/133 ’09 (O. Roy)
Patrick O’Sullivan1		Trade (CAR, ’09): with 2/58 ’09 (J. Blacker, TOR) for E. Cole and 5/131 ’09 (M. Kennedy)	Trade (PHX, ’10): for J. Vandermeer
Roman Hamrlik		Trade (TBL, ’97): with P. Comrie for B. Marchment, S. Kelly, and J. Bonsignore	Trade (NYI, ’00): for E. Brewer, J. Green, and 2/35 ’00 (B. Winchester)
Jaroslav Spacek		Trade (CHI, ’06): for T. Salmelainen	FA (BUF, ’06)
Matthew Lombardi1		Draft (7/215, ’00)	Draft (CGY, 3/90, ’02)
Tim Sestito		FA (ECHL, ’06)	Trade (NJD, ’09): for a conditional pick (??)
Doug Weight		Trade (NYR, ’93): for E. Tikkanen	Trade (STL, ’01): with M. Riesen for M. Reasoner, J. Hecht, and J. Horacek
Ryan Potulny1		Trade (PHI, ’08): for D. Syvret	FA (CHI, ’10)
Chris Pronger		Trade (STL, ’05): for E. Brewer, D. Lynch, and J. Woywitka	Trade (ANA, ’06): for J. Lupul, L. Smid, 1/30 ’07 (N. Ross, PHX), 1/22 ’08 (J. Eberle), and 2/53 ’08 (T. Hamonic, NYI)
Danny Syvret1		Draft (3/81, ’05)	Trade (PHI, ’08): for R. Potulny
Ray Whitney		FA (SJS, ’97)	Waivers (FLA, ’97)
Mike Comrie1		Draft (3/91, ’99)	Trade (PHI, ’03): for J. Woywitka, 1/25 ’04 (R. Schremp), and 3/81 ’05 (D. Syvret)
		FA (OTT, ’09)	FA (PIT, ’10)
Ty Conklin		FA (NCAA, ’01)	FA (CBJ, ’06)
Marc-Andre Bergeron		FA (QMHJL, ’01)	Trade (NYI, ’07): with 3/73 ’08 (K. Petrov) for D. Grebeshkov
Eric Brewer		Trade (NYI, ’00): with J. Green for 2/35 ’00 (B. Winchester) for R. Hamrlik	Trade (STL, ’05): with D. Lynch and J. Woywitka for C. Pronger
Marc-Antoine Pouliot1		Draft (1/22, ’03)	FA (TBL, ’10)
Dwayne Roloson		Trade (MIN, ’06): for 1/17 ’06 (T. Lewis, LAK) and 3/67 ’07 (S. Machacek, ‘ATL)	FA (NYI, ’09)
Mathieu Roy1		Draft (7/215, ’03)	FA (CBJ, ’09)
Joffrey Lupul		Trade (ANA, ’06): with L. Smid, 1/30 ’07 (N. Ross, PHX), 1/22 ’08 (J. Eberle), and 2/53 ’08 (T. Hamonic, NYI) for C. Pronger	Trade (PHI, ’07): with J. Smith for J. Pitkanen, G. Sanderson, and 3/82 ’09 (C. Abney)
Raffi Torres		Trade (NYI, ’03): with B. Isbister for J. Niinimaa and 2/53 ’03 (E. Tunik)	Trade (CBJ, ’08): for G. Brule
Jason Arnott		Draft (1/7, ’93)	Trade (NJD, ’98): with B. Muir for V. Zelepukin and B. Guerin
Jason Chimera		Draft (5/121, ’97)	Trade (PHX, ’04): with 3/80 ’04 (B. Ryan, NYR) for 2/57 ’04 (G. Paukovich) and 4/112 ’04 (L. Reddox)
Tom Poti		Draft (3/59, ’96)	Trade (NYR, ’02): with R. Murray for M. York and 4/106 ’02 (I. Koltsov)

¹ Not currently on active roster.

² RFA compensation in lieu of 1/14 ’96 (M. Reasoner) and 1/15 ’97 (M. Zultek, LAK)

The current distribution, as of the trade deadline:

• 1 team has five (TBL)
• 2 teams have four (ANA, LAK)
• 4 teams have three (CAR, CGY, CBJ, WAS)
• 7 teams have two (ATL, BUF, DAL, FLA, MIN, MTL, PHI)
• 14 teams have one (BOS, CHI, COL, DET, EDM, NSH, NJD, NYI, OTT, PHX, PIT, STL, TOR, VAN)
• 2 teams have none (NYR, SJS)

Only two teams finished the season with no ex-Oilers: the Rangers and Sharks. Most teams had one, while one team had five (!). Still no idea if this means anything, or if I’m just doing this for my own amusement. We may never know at this point.

Well, I’ll confess to a bit of embarrassment. I really thought Thomas looked vulnerable after the Tampa series, but he got his shit together and earned that Conn Smythe Trophy. Then again, one could also reasonably say that Vancouver laid an egg as much as Thomas et al. shut them down. Injuries were a factor, to be sure: Henrik Sedin and Ryan Kesler, at least, were playing on one leg, while Dan Hamhuis, Mikael Samuelsson, and in Game 7, Mason Raymond, were all badly hurt enough to miss the Finals. But injuries are always a factor, for both teams: Marc Savard (remember him?) and Nathan Horton were both MIA with concussions for all and most of the Finals, respectively. In the end, part of the blame obviously has to go to Luongo, who sieved it up in the three Boston games, and was okay but not good enough last night when he needed to be at his best. But on the other hand, he was brilliant in Games 1, 2, and 5; he had no goal support throughout the series. He needed to allow 0 or fewer goals in five of the seven games to win, and in Game 6, both Canucks goals came in garbage time, well after Luongo had finished for the evening. Luongo wasn’t good enough, but neither were the players in front of him. This is a team loss, and any insinuation that this automatically makes Luongo not a Big Game Goalie, and that this was a career-defining moment, defining him as a Loser, is all absurd. He’s played in big games before and won, he’s bounced back from shit games before with brilliant performances, and this loss only defines his career if he never makes it back.

But enough about the losers; credit must be given to the champions where it’s due. Thomas, as noted, was brilliant, giving up just eight goals in seven games, which must be some kind of record, made the most saves in Stanley Cup Playoffs and Stanley Cup Finals history, finished with a stats line of 1.98/.940, and pitched four shutouts, two of them in the Finals (the two SO stats, funny enough, mirror those of Luongo). Chara and Seidenberg did their job in shutting down the Sedins’ cycle game. Methuselah Recchi went out in style, with seven points in the Final series. Brad Marchand came out of nowhere to be a Luongo-wrecking machine, scoring five goals in the Bruins’ four victories and setting a team rookie record with 11 post-season goals. David Krejci led the NHL in playoff goals (12) and points (23). They overcame 2-0 playoff series deficits for the first two times in their 86-season history in Montreal and Vancouver, winning both series in seven games. After putting forth one of the biggest choke jobs in the history of professional sport last year, the Bruins bounced back and proved themselves worthy contenders. Congratulations to the better team.

As for our little contest here, well, as I noted before, Hoop won again, with Gerard placing second, Matt (the only one to nail the Final series) third, and me fourth. Congratulations etc., I hate you all, see you next year.

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-3	4-1	4-2	4-2	4-1
4-3	4-3	4-2	4-2	4-3
2-0	2-0	1-1	1-1	W-L
2	0	6	6	GO
1	2	0	0	PS
8-6	11-3	8-6	10-4	W-L
29	23	34	33	GO
6	4	1	1	PS

I can’t win now, but my record of six perfect predictions is safe, at least. On to the main event.

(1) Vancouver vs. (7) Boston

Playoff History: Unsurprisingly, none.

Finals History: The storied Bruins franchise has a long history of success, with a steady stream of Finals appearances from their inception in the 1920s to the late 1950s. After a few years of futility, the entrance of Bobby Orr and Phil Esposito ushered in the Big Bad Bruins era, which extended past the departure of both superstars as Don Cherry’s “Lunchpail Gang” took over. The Bourque-Neely Bruins were a consistent contender for a few years in the late ’80s and early ’90s, and made a couple of Finals appearances, but were also eliminated twice by the future-champion Penguins and once by the eventual runners-up, the Canadiens. Despite making the dance seventeen times, though, the Bruins have only won the Cup five times, the last in 1972. Most remarkably, they’ve lost all seven Finals played against the Canadiens, by a combined W-L record of 7-26; good thing they haven’t been able to meet in the Finals since the NHL changed the playoff format in 1981. The B’s have also lost their last five consecutive Finals, going 5-20 in those series.

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
2-4	4-0	4-2	2-4	0-4	2-4	0-4	1-4

The Canucks’ 40-year history is fraught with bad hockey (and sometimes good hockey torpedoed by bad goaltending), bad uniforms, and bad luck. Missing Gil Perrault? Getting stuck as Alberta’s perpetual punching bag in the ’80s? The Flying V? Dan Cloutier? Ouch. They’ve managed a couple of Finals appearances, both of them on Cinderella runs, but have yet to bring home the prize. This year represents a departure, in that they’re a legitimate contender and favourite for the first time ever.

1982	1994
0-4	3-4

Season Series: Boston won the only meeting of the season, 3-1 on an empty-netter.

Doogie Says: You know, the more I read and think about this series, the more I realize that this series will go exactly as long as Tim Thomas forces it to. Vancouver has superior forward depth, especially if Manny Malhotra can take on even part of his former role (one wonders what difference a healthy Marc Savard would make here: could his loss be a Stanley Cup-costing injury?), superior defensive depth (and indeed, superior defencemen outside of Chara, though injuries are always a concern), superior special teams, superior shot differential, superior just about everything. So the key to me will be, how many games can Tim Thomas steal? During the Tampa series, and indeed during parts of the Montreal series, he’s looked fairly shaky, but when he’s had to shut the door, he’s been brilliant. I don’t for a second think that he’ll be able to steal four games, but one? Certainly. Two? Very possibly. He’ll also have a couple of games where he gets deked so far out of position by the Sedin line that, to borrow a joke from Ryan Lambert of Yahoo!, he’ll be watching the goal from the neutral zone. But the longer Thomas can stem the tide, the more hope the Bruins have, and the more chance that a funny hop can change the course of the series. In the end, though, I think Vancouver is just too good of a team, and have been all year, and I believe they’ll be able to close it out at home, in spite of whatever heroics this year’s probable Vezina winner has in store. Vancouver in five; Ryan Kesler for MVP.

Hoop Says: As much as I try to find a way that the Bruins could beat the Canucks, short of Tim Thomas playing the series of his life I can’t find anything that makes sense. The Canucks are deeper than the Bruins up front and on defense. Sure you have to give the edge to the Bruins in net but it just won’t be enough. Also history is working in the Canucks favor. Whenever a Canadian city hosts an Olympics the following year that city wins the Stanley Cup. Won’t be different this year. Vancouver in five; Ryan Kesler for MVP.

Matt Says: Boston in seven.

Gerard Says: Boston in six; Ryan Kesler for MVP.

	1	3	1	0	1	2	0	3
	0	2	8	4	0	5	4	4

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-2	4-2	4-2	4-1	4-2
4-3	4-3	4-2	4-1	4-3
4-2	4-1	4-1	4-2	4-0
4-2	4-3	4-2	4-2	4-0
2-2	2-2	2-2	3-1	W-L
12	12	10	11	GO
2	1	1	0	PS
6-6	9-3	7-5	9-3	W-L
27	23	28	27	GO
5	2	1	1	PS

One, either I get a series perfectly or not at all: five of my six correct predictions were bang on the money. Two, I’ve pretty much nailed the West (a brain-fart in DET-PHX away from being perfect) and have no clue about the East (1-5, the only winner being the WSH-NYR gimme). So given that, take what I say about the West as gospel, and what I say about the East as utter nonsense.

You will also notice that Matt’s picks are once again late. Never trust a Campbell. [Edit: They're there now.]

Clarence Campbell Conference Finals

(1) Vancouver vs. (2) San Jose

Playoff History: None.

Season Series: 3-1 Vancouver. Each team had one SOW, while Vancouver’s other two wins were 6-1 (back when the Sharks were struggling) and 4-3.

Doogie Says: This is the series where I expected Vancouver to most keenly miss Manny Malhotra (note that I’m excluding the possibility of his return in the playoffs, despite recent activities). A third-line centre doesn’t seem like a lot, but given that he took a copious amount of minutes against top lines, penalty-kill shifts, and defensive-zone faceoffs, that ripple effect down the lineup is huge. Ryan Kesler is more than capable of filling the role with Maxim Lapierre (?!) providing support, but neither Chicago nor Nashville is as deep as San Jose, who can roll three capable lines. That could spell trouble for the Lapierre line, as whomever they wind up against is probably going to be a lot better than them. Round Two’s storyline for Vancouver was whether Ryan Kesler would resume his regular-season form. Truthfully, he’d played very well, but hadn’t been able to put the puck in the back of the net, and sure enough, with only one good line to deal with on the Preds, he was able to pile on and seize the playoff scoring lead. This round, it’s about whether the Sedins can start lighting it up again. Again, they’ve played very well, but just haven’t gotten the breaks. That could very well change against San Jose, given how volatile their goaltending has been in the playoffs.

As for San Jose, as noted, this is the best team Vancouver’s faced in the playoffs. They got taken to the limit by Detroit despite being up 3-0, but given how absurdly close the scores were (seven one-goal games, excluding EN), and how the balance of play seemed to constantly shift, with both teams taking and giving up big leads and switching between dominator and dominatee, and each team winning one they probably didn’t “deserve” (Games 3 and 5), it was a very well-matched series, and the order of the wins probably shouldn’t be read into too terribly much. Thornton and Marleau traditionally have been excoriated for “gutless” playoff performances, but aside from the fact that I’ve never generally bought that — I’ll always remember people ripping Joe Thornton for a subpar performance in 2004 while playing through cracked ribs — they’ve been putting up points (especially Thornton) and moving the puck in the right direction despite getting a lot of starts in the defensive zone against the other team’s top players. In watching the games, you can even see Joe Thornton backchecking, something I’m frankly not too familiar with. Ryan Kesler and the Hamhuis-Bieksa pairing are gonna have their hands full with that line. Meanwhile, the Wellwood line’s been solid in sheltered circumstances, as has Logan Couture (though his Game 7 goal, where he picked off a Henrik Zetterberg pass and roofed it in one smooth motion, was the stuff of legend). Dany Heatley, meanwhile? Invisible and terrible. His underlying stats are bad, and in watching about half of the last series, I almost forgot he was even on the team for large stretches. The Sharks have even gotten some pretty solid offence from the blueline, particularly from Dan Boyle, who’s had a great playoff so far. If the Canucks are going to stop the Sharks’ forward corps, they’re going to have to rely on their superior depth on defence: Sami Salo and Keith Ballard is a better third pairing than Jason Demers and Marc-Edouard Vlasic, which makes life a lot easier for Alain Vigneault in deciding the matchups.

So all of this blithering having occurred, where do I stand? Well, the Canucks have had better outshooting numbers at five-on-five (they had the stronger opponent in Round 1 and the lesser opponent in Round 2; I’m not sure how much of that washes out), better goaltending (Niemi: 3.01/.906; Luongo: 2.25/.917), and in all likelihood better possession numbers (which I’d be able to show if timeonice.com was working). While their scoring hasn’t been as consistent and even as San Jose’s, I feel like over the course of seven games, being just slightly better often enough will give them the victory. Vancouver in seven.

Hoop Says: I don’t know if it could have worked out much better for the Canucks in this match-up. San Jose got taken to the limit and were quite fortunate to get a win over the Wings in 7 games, but it came at a cost as Ryan Clowe is clearly hurting and won’t have a ton of time to recover. Vancouver has been home and cooled for a few days now and is getting healthier with the exception of Manny Malholtra who the Canucks are going to dearly miss.

This series is one where you almost have to give the check mark to the Canucks in all three of goaltending, defense, and offense. I suspect the Sedin twins will finally break out this series as San Jose doesn’t really have the nasty shutdown defense that causes them trouble. Both teams will also be grateful that they don’t have to leave their time zone in this series which should help their travel schedules and make things easier for whoever comes out of this series.

I have a sneaking suspicion this one won’t be that close. Vancouver in five.

Matt Says: San Jose in six.

Gerard Says: San Jose in six.

	3	7	3	4	3	4
	2	3	4	2	2	1

Prince of Wales Conference Finals

(3) Boston vs. (5) Tampa Bay

Playoff History: None.

Season Series: 3-1 Boston. Three of the games were close (though all decided in regulation), with a fourth being a pre-Roloson 8-1 blowout by the Bruins.

Doogie Says: I’ve indicated already that I don’t really know what the fuck I’m talking about in the Eastern conference, so I’ll keep this considerably more brief. I indicated back in Round 1 that if the Bolts could get the goaltending from Roli that the Oilers got in ’06, that they were a good enough team to make a deep run. I didn’t buy it in Round 2, and took the Caps; big mistake. That being said, I’m still not sure what to make of them in Round 3. They have the best shooting and save percentage in the playoffs, and are getting murdered by shots, after putting up a strong positive shot differential and losing on the back of poor goaltending and inconsistent scoring during the regular season. I really want to jump on the Lightning bandwagon, but I just can’t do it. Seeing everything turned on its ear like that just makes me itchy. Plus, Sean Bergenheim is pulling a Fernando Pisani, and you never know when the clock’s gonna strike midnight on a run like that. The main thing that has me even considering Tampa is the fact that Patrice Bergeron is out with a “mild” concussion. In theory, he’s supposed to be back early in the series, but in practice, he has a history of severe concussions, and that always makes me feel like it’s somewhat of a dice-roll. As with Buffalo-Philly in Round 1, I’m sort of banking on how long an injury’s gonna last. If Bergeron is gone for the series, that’s a huge hole at centre for the Bruins to fill, and Chris Kelly and Brad Marchand ain’t gonna cut it. If he’s back early, probably no need to worry. Last time, I was right on the extent of the injury, but (essentially) wrong about Buffalo’s inability to hold on to a large lead. This time, let’s hope that Boston’s more sustainable absurdly-good goaltending (Tim Thomas has done this before recently, and has been doing it all season) and the possible resurrection of Milan Lucic (and their power play) can keep them in the series long enough for their best two-way player to make his return. Boston in seven.

Hoop Says: This one could be a lot of fun or it could be a tough series to watch loaded with defensive play. I choose to pick the first option for this one! Both teams have been resting up so neither side has an advantage in that regard. Boston killed a lot of Demons in their sweep of the Flyers, while the Lightning are proving how good they are in their total destruction of the Capitals in the second round. Both sides have to be feeling good going into the series.

I’m actually having a tough time handicapping the series but I will give Boston a slight edge in net, and a big edge on the defensive side as Chara will be a huge factor for the Bruins chances. Up front Tampa Bay clearly has more firepower than Boston, it will just come down to how well they can fight through the Bruins much stronger team defense.

It’s going to be a tough and long series! Boston in seven.

Matt Says: Boston in six.

Gerard Says: Boston in six.

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