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

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-3	4-1	4-2	4-2	4-3
4-1	4-1	4-1	4-0	4-2
4-2	4-2	4-2	4-3	4-0
4-2	4-3	4-3	4-2	4-2
4-1	4-2	4-2	4-3	4-1
4-3	4-3	4-1	4-1	4-3
4-2	4-1	4-2	4-2	4-3
4-2	4-3	4-2	4-2	4-3
4-4	7-1	5-3	6-2	W-L
15	11	18	16	GO
3	1	0	1	PS

Somehow, I picked three series perfectly and only got four right altogether. One of those was a total brain cramp (Really? Phoenix?), but the rest were such total crapshoots. Two were one-goal games, one in OT. Ah, well, enough of the excuses. Time to make up ground in round two. Somehow.

Clarence Campbell Conference Semifinals

(1) Vancouver vs. (5) Nashville

Playoff History: None. Nashville continues to add variety to their meagre playoff resume.

Season Series: Tied 2-2, all in regulation. No game had more that four total goals scored, nor a margin of victory greater than three.

Doogie Says: One of the more curious factoids to come out of the first round is the fact that the Predators finished second in goals per game (3.67), behind only Detroit (4.50). Yes, the same Predators who scored just 2.60 goals per game during the regular season, tied with Toronto and Montreal at 8^th-worst in the League. Now, you could believe that the bottom end of Nashville’s roster has suddenly morphed into actual scoring depth, or you could believe that Anaheim was running on 1.5 NHL-calibre defencemen (Lubo had a busted shoulder and was, by his own admission, at about 50%) and got what they deserved. I’m going with the latter. As for Vancouver, even with two no-shows, they outplayed the Blackhawks, who got an outstanding performance from young Corey Crawford, especially in Games 6 and 7. I’m not personally inclined to believe that the Blackhawks got into their heads, so much as they got cocky, let their foot off the gas for a couple of games, then had to scramble to get back in it, and very nearly got smote by the hockey gods for their hubris. Whether they’ve learned their lesson is a matter for debate — their post-G7 quotes were all about how they kicked Chicago’s ass for five of those games and should’ve ended the series sooner, which could be taken as either arrogance or an acknowledgment that they let it get away in Games 4 and 5 — but I’m inclined to believe that that little bit of adversity might have gotten their heads screwed back on right. (Anecdotally, last year’s WHL-leading Calgary Hitmen went down 1-3 to Moose Jaw before storming back to win the series in seven, and go all the way to the Memorial Cup semi-final. Make of that what you will.) Plus, if you’d rather go with advanced stats, they murdered the Blackhawks in even-strength, score-tied possession, which is generally a good strategy in trying to win hockey games. Pekka Rinne, while he has been on and off this playoff so far, is capable of stealing a couple of games here, but the Canucks are still too deep to be too concerned about here. Whomever they get out of the Sharks-Wings series is going to give them trouble, no doubt, but the Preds just aren’t there yet. Vancouver in six.

Hoop Says: That was the biggest goal that Alex Burrows has ever scored in game seven since his days with the Montreal Red Light (look it up). With his goal, the Canucks barely escaped with their lives. The Nashville Predators also managed to break on through to the other side thanks in large part to Jordan Tootoo and his emergence as a playoff performer. The Canucks have some serious questions in net with Roberto Luongo despite his gutty performance in Game 7 and I have to give the Preds and Pekka Rinne the edge in net. Up front and on the blue line it’s tough for anyone to match up with Vancouver. I really think Nashville is going to catch the Canucks off guard in Game 1 and possibly steal that game, but in the end Vancouver has the depth that Nashville won’t be able to handle. Vancouver in six.

Matt Says: If they can do this, maybe I’ll start believe its their year. Vancouver in six.

Gerard Says: Nashville in five.

	1	1	3	4	3	2	4
	0	2	2	2	4	1	2

(2) San Jose vs. (3) Detroit

Playoff History: These two teams have met twice since the lockout, splitting the two series. Before that, we have the legendary ’94 upset by the Sharks, and Detroit’s revenge the following year en route to the Cup Finals.

1994 CQF	1995 CSF	2007 CSF	2010 CSF
4-3	4-0	4-2	4-1

Season Series: San Jose won 3-1, all in regulation. Only one game was decided by less than two goals.

Doogie Says: In looking back at Detroit’s late-season results, it turns out their spring swoon lines up rather neatly with Pavel Datsyuk’s seven-game injury: during that stretch, they went 1-3-3, including a 10-3 shellacking by the St. Louis Blues. After he returned, they finished the year 2-2, with losses against surging Carolina and better-than-they-looked Chicago. So maybe I shouldn’t have written them off in the first round. Yes, I’m covering my ass a little because they swept my pick in that series, but it also turns out that in making that pick, I violated my own rule of not reading too much into late-season streaks one way or the other. And now that they have Zetterberg back, they’re looking very strong again. San Jose had a surprising amount of trouble with LA in their first-round series: while they outchanced the Kings pretty badly on the whole, when the score was tied, anyway, possession was about even, which is kind of interesting in a small-sample sort of way. Antti Niemi had all kinds of trouble in that last series, and while his Round 1 stats (3.99/.863) are obviously not indicative of his true talent, it remains a valid question whether he can right the ship before the Wings have made him look bad a couple of times and Niittymaki (0.66/0.967 in 91.5 minutes of relief time) gets the net for good. All that being said, I think Niemi can make the turnaround, and with San Jose being one of the top outshooting teams in the League, both regular season and playoffs, and Jimmy Howard being merely adequate, it adds up to San Jose in seven.

Hoop Says: Ho hum, just another Detroit and San Jose match up. The Wings made short work of Phoenix in four straight, while the San Jose Sharks barely hung on to avoid being shocked by the LA Kings. Starting in net, these teams match up evenly: Howard and Niemi are pretty much a wash. Up front, San Jose can come at you in waves and have more depth than even the Wings do. On the back end, Detroit has the edge. Anyone with Nicklas Lidstrom always has an edge on the blue line! I’ve waffled a couple times on this series and want to lean towards the Sharks but I just don’t trust that team. I’ll take the Wings in a bit of an upset. Detroit in seven.

Matt Says: Deep down, I want to say the Sharks, but it’ll be a fight. Detroit in six.

Gerard Says: San Jose in five.

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

Prince of Wales Conference Semifinals

(1) Washington vs. (5) Tampa Bay

Playoff History: They’ve played once before, back when Jagr was still a Cap, and the nucleus of the Cup-winning team was still growing together.

2003 CQF
4-2

Season Series: 4-2 Washington, with one of their wins coming in OT. Both of Tampa’s wins were Roloson shutouts, shortly after his arrival, while Washington’s three non-SO wins came by a combined goal differential of +12.

Doogie Says: Yes, Dwayne Roloson has an absurdly high save percentage through Round 1, and yes, hot goalies can get you far in the playoffs. On the other hand…man, that Pens offence is pretty popgun without Crosby and Malkin, isn’t it? I mean, 1/35 on the man advantage? Really? Now, the Caps may be without Mike Green for a while — I don’t know if he’s over blocking that snapshot with his melon yet — they did just fine without him down the stretch, and more importantly, the stars are finally buying into Boudreau’s system. Ovechkin is, according to his coach, playing the most complete hockey of his career right now. Semin is scoring in the playoffs. Jason Arnott, Stanley Cup Champion (™), seems to have the attention and respect of the room and is helping reinforce the message. And so on. The Caps have the star power and offence the Pens lacked, and I can’t help but feel like the Bolts are time bomb, and that at some point they’re going to play the way we know they can, and get shelled 7-0, and all will be right with the world. Roli may steal a game or two, but the clock’s gotta strike midnight for this bunch soon. Washington in six.

Hoop Says: The Capitals finally got some stable goaltending and were able to dispatch the Rangers in short order, while the Tampa Bay Lightning barely got by the Penguins in seven. I’m going to give the edge to the Lightning in net, but that is it in this series. While the Penguins were missing Crosby and Malkin, the Capitals look to be in good shape and Tampa will have all they can handle across the board. I don’t see a scenario where Tampa wins unless the Caps’ goaltending collapses, which I don’t think happens yet. Washington in five.

Matt Says: I believe in lightning striking twice (see what I did there?). Tampa Bay in five.

Gerard Says: Tampa Bay in six.

	2	2	3	3	0
	4	3	4	5	4

(2) Philadelphia vs. (3) Boston

Playoff History: Ah ha ha ha ha ha…oh, man. Spending upwards of seven games talking about how the Broons screwed the pooch last year is a pretty solid consolation prize for three overtime losses.

1974 SCF	1976 SF	1977 SF	1978 SF	2010 CSF
4-2	4-1	4-0	4-1	4-3

Season Series: 3-0-1 Boston. Philly’s only win came in OT.

Doogie Says: I’m sorry, I have no rational analysis here. Fuck Boston in their stupid faces. I don’t care if the Lazy Susan of Sieves is manning the crease for the Flyers (though Boucher’s actually been pretty good on the whole — 2.10/.934 in 285.5 minutes). Pronger’s back, the Bruins got rolled by the Habs at even strength, and I want to see a frown under Tim Thomas’s stupid 70s-detective moustache. Philadelphia in six. Suck on it, Broons.

Hoop Says: Two of the better first round series happened with the Flyers getting by Buffalo in seven, while the Bruins got a Nathan Horton Game 7 OT winner to beat the Canadiens in quite possible the best first round series ever. In net, there is no question that the Bruins have the edge with Tim (yes I still have a goalie crush on him) Thomas ahead of anyone the Flyers throw between the pipes. Up front, Philly has a clear edge in talent; on the back end, it is very close. A key could be how healthy Chris Pronger is, because you know the Bruin forwards are going to be taking runs at him every chance they get. Zdeno Chara will be a rock for the Bruins as well, so call it a wash. I’m not sure how the Bruins are going to score enough, but I think they will just squeak through. Boston in seven.

Matt Says: Why did my two Eastern favourites have to come up against each other? Umm…ahh…Philadelphia in six.

Gerard Says: Boston in six.

	3	2	1	1	0
	7	3	5	5	4

Editor’s Note: Matt’s picks are going up late, because he’s screwing the pooch really busy at work. So I present the other three, and will edit his in whenever he gets around to giving them to me. [Ed: And now they're up.]

Editor’s Note #2: Picks may be late, considering Round #2 starts tomorrow and I have a presentation to prepare for on Friday morning. I may write postmortems for all the series on the weekend or something, or I may get distracted by a shiney.

Clarence Campbell Conference Quarterfinals

(1) Vancouver vs. (8) Chicago

Playoff History: Pretty one-sided, all told. The Hawks and Canucks have met each of the last two years in the playoffs, and both times, the Hawks have come out the victors.

1982 CF	1995 CSF	2009 CSF	2010 CSF
4-1	4-0	4-2	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: The Canucks were ousted by the Blackhawks for the second year in a row, and this time, the ‘Hawks went on to win it all, defeating Philly in six for the Stanley Cup.

Season Series: Tied at two. Interesting note: Turco played three of the four games for Chicago, winning one in the SO and losing the other two.

Doogie Says: There’s a real temptation here to call for the upset, based on recent history, and yes, the fact that Turco’s kind of bad suggests that maybe Vancouver’s wins weren’t entirely earned, and yes, the Canucks and Blackhawks actually had pretty similar possession numbers through the regular season, I can’t shake the feeling that this is Vancouver’s year. Consider the fact that they were down an average of 1.5 top-six D all year, but still ripped it up by counting numbers and were near the top of the League in underlying stats. Sure, they had arguably the weakest division in hockey to beat up on, but they also put up a strong record against the rest of the League (18-4-2 vs. Northwest, 11-5-2 vs. East, 25-10-2 vs. Central/Pacific). On the other hand, while Chicago is weaker overall than they were last year, they do still have the championship core, and were hurt rather significantly by Marty Turco’s abject awfulness (3.02/.897): if he’s even average, they’re division champions, so by no means will the Canucks be crushing them like some have predicted. Still, as much as I’d like to believe that Chelsea Dagger will be serenading Roberto Luongo in his nightmares for another year, I doubt the Canucks are so mentally fragile that history alone will get them down if they lose the first game or something. If they lose, it’ll be because the Blackhawks were the better team, but I don’t think that’s going to be the case this year, though no matter what, it’ll be a dandy. Vancouver in seven.

Hoop Says: God I hate the Canucks! Almost as much as I hate that stupid Chelsea Dagger song in Chicago. Lets be blunt Vancouver is better than Chicago everywhere on the ice except perhaps with the captains. Chicago lost all their depth this off season must importantly some large fellow named Byfuglien to Atlanta. Without the big man to cause Roberto Luongo a continuous nightmare I don’t see the Hawks doing much of anything. Vancouver in five.

Matt Says: Chicago in six. Maybe it’ll be third time lucky for Vancouver, but still going with the Hawks.

Gerard Says: Chicago in six. [Ed: You will note that once again, Gerard has provided no explanation for his picks. Is it because he has no justification, and just pulled stuff out of thin air, or because he likes appearing off the cuff, 'cause that's how he rolls? Only he may know for sure. Only I may actually care.]

	2	4	3	2	0	3	2	4
	0	3	2	7	5	4	1	3

(2) San Jose vs. (7) Los Angeles

Playoff History: None in the modern incarnation of the Sharks, but if you take the Sharks to be the continuation of the Seals/Barons franchise — and I do — then we have one meeting, all the way back in the summer spring of ’69.

1969 QF
4-3

Previously On…Survivor: The Sharks went all the way to the conference finals before getting swept by Chicago in a series that was closer than the result would indicate. The Kings got their first taste of playoff hockey in nearly a decade, and nearly upset the Canucks before ultimately falling in six.

Season Series: Tied at three. Three of the games were decided by three or more goals, and the other three were all one-goal affairs (two went to LA, both in the SO).

Doogie Says: I don’t actually have much to say about this series. I figure LA’s pretty well boned, what with no Kopitar, Williams fresh off injury, and Doughty struggling. Sure, I could try to cast aspersions on the suddenness of San Jose’s rise up the standings, but then again, I never believed they were that bad in the first place. Let’s just call it “regression to the mean,” say San Jose in five, and move on, because I have six more of these bloody things to write.

Hoop Says: What a great series this was going to be until Anze Kopitar went down with his broken ankle for the Kings. San Jose is rolling at the right time, and even though I think the Kings have the edge in goal between Quick and Niemi I don’t think the Kings can match up anywhere else right now. San Jose in five.

Matt Says: San Jose in five. Standard fare it appears…

Gerard Says: San Jose in four.

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

(3) Detroit vs. (6) Phoenix

Playoff History: Same as last year, except with one more column in the table. The Jets/Coyotes still haven’t beaten the Red Wings (or anyone other than the Flames) in the playoffs, and for the second time in a row, face the possibility of ending their time in a city with a loss to Detroit.

1996 CQF	1998 CQF	2010 CQF
4-2	4-2	4-3

Previously On…Survivor: The Red Wings ousted the Coyotes in a tightly-contested seven-game series, then promptly got booted by San Jose in five.

Season Series: Tied at two, with both of Detroit’s wins coming in OT and one of Phoenix’s two wins coming in the shootout. The remaining game was decided by an empty-netter. So, you know, close.

Doogie Says: The peril of using regular-season stats to predict the playoffs is that sometimes they’re not reflective of the current reality. I talked about this a little with the Canucks-Blackhawks series, and this is another example. Consider how close the season series was, and how close the last playoff series was, and then consider the fact that Shane Doan missed most of that playoff series, while Henrik Zetterberg will miss an indeterminate amount of this one. The Wings are another year older and have been beat up all year; at a certain point, something has to give, and Ilya Bryzgalov is a good enough goalie to withstand getting outshot pretty heavily, as all of Detroit’s opponents tend to be. While there’d be a certain historical symmetry if they were to go out to Detroit then get moved back to Winnipeg, I think this is finally the Coyotes’ time to break the Curse of Dale Hawerchuk and win their first playoff series in 24 years. Phoenix in six.

Hoop Says: Detroit is deeper than Phoenix. Detroit has more playoff experience than Phoenix. Detroit may have home ice advantage in all seven games over Phoenix in this series. So this should be easy right? Oh hell no! Phoenix has two things. The best coach in the league in Dave Tippett and they have an all world goaltender in Ilya Bryzgalov. I think Coach Tippett will have a game plan but Bryzgalov will have to have the series of his life for the Coyotes to win. Detroit in six.

Matt Says: Detroit in six. It’s Detroit.

Gerard Says: Detroit in seven.

	4	4	4	6	4
	2	3	2	3	0

(4) Anaheim vs. (5) Nashville

Playoff History: None. The Ducks are just the fourth unique playoff opponent in Predators history.

Previously On…Survivor: The Ducks missed the dance last year, but the year before, upset the Sharks in round one and nearly ousted the Wings in round two before falling in seven. The Preds, as they are wont to do, lost in six in the first round, though they were arguably one short-handed goal away from putting Chicago on the ropes.

Season Series: Nashville won 3-1, all games in regulation.

Doogie Says: History would suggest that picking either Nashville or Phoenix to win a first-round series is foolish, and here I am, picking both. My reasoning here is pretty simple: Anaheim’s not very good. Their depth is weak, they have the worst outshooting numbers in the playoff pool, and until they put the wood to the Sharks in the final week of the year, they were the only minus team in the playoffs…and yet they have home-ice advantage. I thought this team’s D was bad going into the season, and even with Visnovsky and Lydman having strong years, that remains true. They were bailed out early by Jonas Hiller’s Vezina-calibre season and late by Corey Perry’s vintage Wayne Gretzky impersonation and Teemu Selanne’s vintage Teemu Selanne impersonation. Sure, Nashville’s boring and has no one you’ve heard of other than Shea Weber, who’s a favourite to win the Norris this year, but they’re solid and well-coached and have a Vezina-calibre goalie who hasn’t spent the past two months having dizzy spells. Against someone other than the Detroits or Chicagos of the world, that’s probably enough. Time to throw the catfish and get your party on, Music City. You’re goin’ to Round Two. Nashville in six.

Hoop Says: I will be watching every minute of this series that I possibly can! This series will be a knock ‘em down, drag ‘em out, all out war! Anaheim has the better top end scoring. The Predators have better depth up front. Nashville has the best defense pair. Anaheim’s D may be a little deeper. It comes down to Pekka Rinne vs whoever Anaheim throws into the net as they have a bunch of solid goaltenders. I think this is finally the year though. Nashville in seven.

Matt Says: Anaheim in seven. I may be completely wrong here (and the others’ picks certainly seem to indicate so), but can’t the Ducks continue to be mighty?

Gerard Says: Nashville in six.

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

Prince of Wales Conference Quarterfinals

(1) Washington vs. (8) NY Rangers

Playoff History: An old Patrick Division rivalry, though because Washington was kind of crap until the late ’80s, it didn’t have the traction some other combinations did.

1986 DF	1990 DF	1991 DSF	1994 CSF	2009 CQF
4-2	4-1	4-2	4-1	4-3

Previously On…Survivor: The Caps were stunned by Jaro Halak’s Montreal Canadiens in a seven-game upset, hocking up a 3-1 series lead in the process. The Rangers’ last playoff appearance was two years ago, when they hocked up a 3-1 series lead to these very Washington Capitals. Oh, symmetry.

Season Series: The Rangers won the last three meetings in a row, two in regulation and another in the shootout. The most recent match was a 6-0 drubbing of the Caps on February 25.

Doogie Says: I know a lot of people have looked at the season series, seen the scorelines, and called for the upset, but I think you have to discount that stuff, here. Never mind the fact that it’s only four games, anyway: when two of them are blowouts, and thus outliers, you might as well forget the whole thing and focus on what else you’ve got. That being: a Rangers team without one of their best forwards, which barely held on in the final week, versus a Capitals team that’s made real improvements defensively, even in the absence of Dennis Wideman, and seems to be taking a number of cues from Stanley Cup champion Jason Arnott, who came in at the deadline. King Henrik is always capable of stealing a series — though I wouldn’t dismiss the Caps’ young goalies, either — but otherwise, I don’t think the Rangers have the horses for this matchup. Washington in five.

Hoop Says: You are going to have a really tough time convincing me that the New York Rangers can match up anywhere on the ice with the Capitals other than between the pipes. I do think Henrik Lundqvist can steal a game or two in this series but he won’t be able to hold off the Caps long enough. I expect Ovechkin to have a huge series here. Washington in six.

Matt Says: Rangers in six. The Caps are still a big playoff question mark for me. Going with Gerard on this one.

Gerard Says: Rangers in seven.

	2	2	2	4	3	4
	1	0	3	3	1	1

(2) Philadelphia vs. (7) Buffalo

Playoff History: The Flyers and Sabres have one of the more storied rivalries amongst post-1967 teams, one which started out a little one-sided before the Sabres took three of the last four meetings, including the only one since the lockout.

1975 SCF	1978 QF	1995 CQF	1997 CSF	1998 CQF	2000 CQF	2001 CQF	2006 CQF
4-2	4-1	4-1	4-1	4-1	4-1	4-2	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: The Flyers snuck in on the last day, very nearly the last game of the entire NHL schedule, and went all the way to the Finals before falling to the Blackhawks in six. The Sabres won their division last year, but were ousted by Tim Thomas and the Boston Bruins in the first round in six games.

Season Series: Tied at two, with the Flyers getting the edge in points thanks to an OTL in their most recent meeting just a few days ago.

Doogie Says: I’ve been dreading this series, because I really have no idea which way to go, and it’s entirely due to our old friend, Chris Pronger. Since he went down, his Flyers have played like hot garbage, barely able to keep pace against bad teams, never mind the decent ones. On the other hand, if Pronger can come back early enough in the series, I’m not sure I’d want to be Buffalo. Speaking of Buffalo, their main advantage is probably goaltending: while Miller’s come back to Earth a bit this year, Enroth has played well during Miller’s recent injury, and their goaltending is probably more reliable than Philly’s, anyway. Buffalo can score enough to get by, though Philly’s one of the highest-scoring teams in the League, even with their recent swoon. Again, at the risk of repeating myself, it’s all about Pronger: if he’s gone long enough, the Flyers may wind up in a hole they can’t dig themselves out of; if he comes back early, then even the ghost of Taro Tsujimoto won’t save the Sabres. Split the difference, say Buffalo in seven, and pray.

Hoop Says: I really, really, really want to pick the Sabres to win this series but I can’t. Philly is just too deep and Chris Pronger will be back sooner rather than later and that makes the biggest difference in this series. Buffalo is going to put up a heck of a fight but it just won’t be enough. Philadelphia in seven.

Matt Says: Philadelphia in five. Completely off the cuff…

Gerard Says: Philadelphia in five.

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

(3) Boston vs. (6) Montreal

Playoff History: Welcome, friends, to the 87^th annual 33^rd meeting between the Boston Bruins and Montreal Canadiens in the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Not sure there’s anything more I can say here that I didn’t say in 2008, 2009, or even 2010 when it looked like it was gonna happen again.

1929 SF	1930 SCF	1931 SF	1943 SF	1946 SCF	1947 SF	1952 SF	1953 SCF
3-0	2-0	3-2	4-1	4-1	4-1	4-3	4-1
1954 SF	1955 SF	1957 SCF	1958 SCF	1968 QF	1969 SF	1971 QF	1977 SCF
4-0	4-1	4-1	4-2	4-0	4-2	4-3	4-0
1978 SCF	1979 SF	1984 DSF	1985 DSF	1986 DSF	1987 DSF	1988 DSF	1989 DF
4-2	4-3	3-0	3-2	3-0	4-0	4-1	4-1
1990 DF	1991 DF	1992 DF	1994 CQF	2002 CQF	2004 CQF	2008 CQF	2009 CQF
4-1	4-3	4-0	4-3	4-2	4-3	4-3	4-0

Previously On…Survivor: The Bruins held a 3-0 series lead in their second-round series against Philly, but gave it all back and became just the third team in NHL history to lose a series while up by three. Because of that, they lost the chance to face Montreal for the third straight year, this time in the conference finals; instead, Montreal went out meekly against the Flyers in that round, losing in just five games.

Season Series: The Habs won it 4-2. It’s worth pointing out that both of Boston’s wins were weird outliers — the 8-6 Tribute to the 80s and the 7-0 post-Pacioretty letdown — but at the same time, the Bruins nearly shut out the Habs on January 8 before they came back in the last five minutes to win in OT. So it’s been weird and either more or less even than it looks.

Doogie Says: The Bruins are, to put it mildly, a high-event team, both taking and giving up the second-most shots at even strength in the NHL this year. They were able to outscore the living crap out of teams in large part because of Tim Thomas’s NHL-record 0.938 SV% this year, and while normally, the stats guys are all over unsustainably high SV% values, it seems to me that Thomas has done this two or three times now, so maybe he’s really just that good. Regardless, the one team he’s historically had trouble against is Montreal, and that’s what I’m banking on pretty heavily: one weird, lopsided shutout isn’t enough to convince me that those daemons have been vanquished at this point, and with Carey Price now playing like the 5^th-overall selection in 2005, the goaltending matchup is going to be pretty compelling. The advanced stats actually like Montreal quite a bit, even with Markov and Gorges gone for half the season, though this is the time of year where a blood-and-guts guy like Gorges comes in really handy (Subban has made his presence felt enough on the PP, anyway, to make up for the offensive component of Markov’s loss, at least). I don’t think Montreal goes as far as they did last year, simply because I think Price is going to wear out at some point soon, but the homer in me is hoping that he holds out long enough to polish off da Broons once again. Montreal in six.

Hoop Says: I don’t think I have picked a Canadiens series correct since 1989 so Montreal fans should be thrilled with my pick. I just don’t see how the Canadiens are going to be able to push their way through the Bruins to get enough quality chances on Tim Thomas who just put up the best save percentage for a season ever. Chara will be a monster. This is easy. Boston in five.

Matt Says: Boston in six. As much as I’d like to see the Canadiens go somewhere, I still am siding with Boston.

Gerard Says: Boston in six.

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

(4) Pittsburgh vs. (5) Tampa Bay

Playoff History: None. These two teams have never really been even decent at the same time, never mind good, so there was never much chance of a playoff matchup.

Previously On…Survivor: The defending-champion Pens were the other team eliminated by Halak in seven in the second round. The Bolts, meanwhile, haven’t made the playoffs since ’07, when they were bounced by the Devils in the opening round in six games.

Season Series: Tied 2-2, though it’s worth noting that the Pens won big in both their victories (5-1 and 8-1) and lost small in their two defeats (5-3 and 2-1).

Doogie Says: You know, I was all ready to write off Tampa as another weak Eastern team outplaying its talent on the back of shitty opposition. But then I looked at the outshooting and possession stats, as best as I could figure out how, anyway, and it turns out they’re actually a pretty solid club with the misfortune of mostly-terrible goaltending. Before Roli showed up, team save percentage was deep into the 80s, which is no way to win hockey games; now, they at least have a guy putting up average numbers, which is a step in the right direction. In that sense, they remind me a little of the ’06 Oilers: great underlying numbers, horrifying goaltending, so they finish lower than you might expect. Still, I don’t know that it’s advisable to predict in favour of the Bolts based on the idea that Roli could recapture the magic, because what if he doesn’t, and continues to play to more-or-less regular-season form? What if Marc-Andre Fleury gets hot, too/instead? What if Roli goes down? What about the remarkable inconsistency he’s shown at times this year, alternating between shutout and blowout? There are too many questions about the most important position out there for me to commit to the Lightning train at this point, especially since the advanced stats still like the Pens, even without Crosby or Malkin. Let me say it here now, though: if Roli gets hot again, I’m not sure I’d bet against the Bolts making their second Cup Final. Pittsburgh in six.

Hoop Says: I’ve had a lot of trouble deciding who I think is going to win this series. This looks like it could be a great match-up and a fantastic series. Offensively the Bolts have the edge until some guy named Sid decides to return which could be soon if he’s needed. The Penguins have a far superior defense, and I think the Penguins have a slight edge in net and that to me is the deciding factor. Pittsburgh in seven.

Matt Says: Tampa Bay in six. Yeah, Tampa in six.

Gerard Says: Tampa Bay in six.

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

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-1	4-1	4-2	4-1	4-2
1-0	1-0	1-0	1-0	W-L
1	1	0	1	GO
8-7	11-4	7-8	8-7	W-L
36	28	35	36	GO
1	4	4	0	PS

You may notice the extra row at the end. Because Gerard and I perfectly tied, the second tiebreaker had to come out, and I arbitrarily selected perfect series. Not because it gave me second place (that was a happy accident), but because it was the only damned thing I had left that I’d tracked.

That sixth game was an absolute classic. It’s a bit of a shame, in a way, that the final goal was a touch anticlimactic, with the delayed reaction of everyone in the building not named Patrick Kane. Then again, there’s something pure and enjoyable about Kane’s whoop of joy being the only sign that the ‘Hawks had just won the Cup for damned near five seconds. Still, the game itself was entertaining pretty much from start to finish: even when the ‘Hawks tried to sit on their lead in the third, they got a few quality chances, and did more by sound positioning than they did by playing that Godforsaken dump and chase that most teams do when they defend a late lead.

The goaltending was awful, sure (neither ‘keeper had a SV% over .900, and the series was the third-highest scoring Final of all-time), but overall, I can’t complain one bit about the quality of the series. What many in the hockey world –including three of us — expected to be a coronation turned out to be a heck of a series with a number of lead changes, history in the making (Briere’s 12 points, one off Gretzky’s record, and 30 points on the playoffs, besting Brian Propp for the Flyers record), and defining moments, the kind of series that wouldn’t have been possible a few years ago (remember the slogfests of the early aughts?). Plus, Game 6 was apparently the highest-rated NHL game since the mid-70s. It did the unthinkable and outdid the NHL’s dream matchups of the last two years in pretty much every way. It’s too bad the salary cap is going to ravage this Chicago team over the summer: I’d love to see more of this next year.

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-2	4-2	4-2	4-3	4-1
4-2	4-2	4-3	4-3	4-0
1-1	1-1	2-0	1-1	W-L
7	7	4	7	GO
7-7	10-4	6-8	7-7	W-L
35	27	35	35	GO

Thankfully, we no longer have Montreal around to gum up the works yet again. This time, it’s just two teams, and hopefully a pretty straightforward selection. Fair warning: Hoop and I wrote novels. The important bits, as always, are in bold.

So of course, the first game where most of the ‘Hawks play like the ‘Hawks, and I miss it. Ah, well. Wednesday!

Stanley Cup Finals

(3) Chicago vs. (18) Philadelphia

Playoff History: The only previous meeting between the ‘Hawks and the Flyers came in the first round of the 1971 playoffs, when Chicago polished off the nascent Broad Street Bullies in four straight en route to their fourth Finals appearance in 11 years.

1971 QF
4-0

Stanley Cup History: The ‘Hawks have not exactly led a charmed life, winning just three Stanley Cups, the fewest of any Original Six team, and none since 1961, the longest active drought. They were also tied with the Rangers for the fewest Final series appearances by an Original Six team prior to this year, at ten. In fact, since making five appearances in 13 years during the Hull-Mikita-Esposito era (1961-73), the ‘Hawks had only been back to the Finals once, and that year, they ran into a buzzsaw.

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

Since the Broad Street Bullies’ reign of terror was silenced spectacularly by the Montreal Canadiens in 1976, the Flyers have become perennial Stanley Cup bridesmaids: they’ve now lost five consecutive Final series, and won only six games in the process, half of which came in the 1987 classic against Edmonton.

1974	1975	1976	1980	1985	1987	1997
4-2	4-2	0-4	2-4	1-4	3-4	0-4

Season Series: The only meeting of the year between the ‘Hawks and Flyers came on March 13, a 3-2 win for the Flyers. Scott Hartnell tied the game with just over two minutes to play, then Chris Pronger scored the winner with just three seconds to go. Michael Leighton made 39 saves — and scored an assist — in the victory.

Doogie Says: The minute the Canadiens eliminated the Penguins in round two, I knew that the Stanley Cup champion was going to come from the West and that it probably wasn’t going to be even close, simply because the East, as a whole, is a shitty conference, and of all the teams there, the only ones that could hope to compete with a Western club had all been polished off by the underdogs. Washington, New Jersey, and Buffalo were all gone early, and with Pittsburgh following soon after, it was down to Montreal, Boston, and Philly, all of whom had made the playoffs in the last week, and none of whom exactly screamed contender.

I do fear that I may have underestimated the Flyers a bit. Certainly, I should’ve seen them coming last round, knowing how many games the Habs had played, and how the Flyers play, and how they’d underachieved due to goaltending injuries throughout the regular season. (I maintain that Ray Emery playing through an abdominal tear directly resulted in the firing of John Stevens back in December.) While they looked dead in the water in round two, with injuries to three important players in Gagne, Carter, and Laperriere, they outlasted the Bruins and staged that epic comeback, thanks in part to Simon Gagne making his dramatic comeback, and Michael Leighton stepping in flawlessly for injured Brian Boucher. Controlling the passive Habs four games out of five proved all too easy after that, especially with Laperriere and Carter making their way back in Game 4.

Yet ultimately, that’s precisely why I can’t lend too much credence to the Flyers as Finalists. Not to denigrate any of their accomplishments, but really, who did they beat? A New Jersey team they’d owned all year (5-1 in the regular season, 4-1 in the playoffs), an offensively inept Bruins team that lost what little it had when Krejci went down to injury, and a passive Canadiens squad that controlled the play exactly one game out of five. Colour me unimpressed. Furthermore, in that one game they did steal, the Habs showed us precisely how you beat the Flyers: move through the neutral zone with speed, dump and chase, forecheck aggressively, force the Philly defence to take penalties. Guess what the ‘Hawks are really good at?

Chicago’s had the much tougher road — Nashville is harder than anyone the Flyers faced, save maybe New Jersey, and it got meaner from there — and in the process of getting here, they’ve had their captain best the franchise record for single-season playoff points streak (13) and tie the franchise record for any playoff points streak, and tied an NHL record with seven consecutive road wins. They have superior skill at just about every position, save maybe goal, and as these playoffs have proven, you don’t need a great goalie to win it all, just good enough. They’ll test Michael Leighton (and Brian Boucher, should he make an appearance) far more than any of New Jersey, Boston, or Montreal did on a far more consistent basis. They’re just the better team all around, and I’ve seen nothing in any of the countering predictions to date that’s swayed me in the slightest. Philly can ride Leighton to victory in a single game, just like they did in the regular-season meeting mentioned above, but the bottom line is, Chicago is simply too much for anyone to handle. ‘Hawks win it in five, ending the longest active Stanley Cup drought and second-longest in NHL history, at 49 years.

Hoop Says: Let’s start in goal for both teams and it’s not exactly what you would call an elite goaltender match up with Antti Niemi for the Blackhawks and Michael Leighton/Brian Boucher for the Flyers. (Yes, I suspect we will see both Flyers goalies in the final) Niemi has been solid throughout the playoffs for the Hawks but never spectacular in my opinion. Leighton just came off what had to be the easiest three shut out performance in a series in the history of the sport. Needless to say I am not convinced at all in the Flyers goaltending as much as I am impressed by the Flyers defense corps. Advantage Hawks

Moving on to the defense for both teams, and this is a great match up! The Hawks’ top pair of Keith and Seabrook will have the task of shutting down the Richards line, while the pair of Chris Pronger and whatever stiff they throw out with him for the next shift [ed: Matt Carle at EV, Kimmo Timmonen on the PP] will be against the Toews line. It may be a bit of a cold hearted way to look at it, but from what I have seen it is true. Pronger is the Conn Smythe nominee for the Flyers with no hesitation in my mind, and he will see a lot of the Hawks’ nominee, Jonathan Toews. The Hawks can easily go five deep on the blue line while I think Pronger will have to play 45 minutes a night to give the Flyers a chance. Advantage Hawks

Moving up front, the Flyers’ Mike Richards has been great all post season for Philly. Philadelphia has also gotten some great play out of Claude Giroux, and Simon Gagne does pose enough of a threat that the Hawks’ D will have their hands full. Now you look at the Hawks and these guys are three lines deep and also have a solid fourth line. I am curious how the Flyers will try and handle Dustin Byfuglien in front of their net. The Sharks’ theory of “leave him alone” certainly did not work. I suspect that by the time this series is over, Byfuglien and Pronger will have a good hate for each other going. I just can’t see how the Flyers’ D will be able to hold up to the depth of skill Chicago brings to the table. Advantage Hawks

Now let’s take a look at the intangibles, starting with home ice advantage. Both teams have tough barns to play in and both should be rocking the entire playoffs. Listen to how noisy it gets in Philly when they play the Kate Smith rendition of God Bless America. The lid may come off that building! The Hawks’ home crowd is nothing to sneeze at either. When that horn goes and they play the stupid (yes, I said it) Chelsea Dagger song after a goal and I think there will be a few. The Madhouse on Madison will be exactly that. But the Flyers could have destiny on their side being the first team to come back from 3-0 down in 35 years to win a series. However, Mike Richards touched the Prince of Wales trophy so that gets wiped out with that curse [ed: Even though Crosby touched it last year?]. That being said, there is some magic in Philadelphia right now. Advantage Flyers

To wrap it up, I just can’t see a way the Flyers can win this series short of a few Hawks getting injured, or I am incorrect about the Flyers goaltending and they pull off another miracle. I also look at who the Flyers beat in New Jersey, Boston, and Montreal and none of those teams are even close to what Chicago will bring to the table. If Chicago can avoid over confidence then they should roll in this series. The funny thing is I would not be shocked to see Philadelphia win game 1 for that reason and for that reason alone I can’t pick a sweep. Your Stanley Cup Champions for 2009-2010 are…

The Chicago Blackhawks in 5 games

I will take Jonathan Toews as the Conn Smythe winner.

Matt Says: This is a tough one…I’m going to say six games. My gut reaction was the Hawks, simply because, contrary to my pick here (What was I thinking? Brainwashed by my ‘Nucklehead roommate, I guess.), they’ve always been a team I cheered for and enjoyed watching play. But, they’re also overall a smaller team, especially against a team like Philly. And as Doogie mentioned, Philly is getting healthier. Leighton is on a roll, and no matter how poorly the Canadiens played, three shutouts in five games, something is going right…

I have a gut feeling I’m going to regret this, but I’m going to go with my initial gut reaction, and say Hawks in six. Let’s see if I can go from 0 and 4, to 2 and 0, and back to 0 and 1.

Gerard Says: Hawks in 5 due to my confusing predictions of the last round.

1. Conklin is not in the Conference Finals/Finals for the first time since the lockout. He always loses (sometimes actively making his team lose) and has the Conklin Curse.
2. Hossa has shared the last two (losing) teams with Conklin and as such is either a victim of the Conklin Curse or has caught it himself.
3. Loser of the Winter Classic who beat the winner of the Winter Classic to continue.
4. The winner of the Winter Classic has lost the Stanley Cup Finals in the last two years.
5. The winner of this year’s Winter Classic lost to the Flyers (the losers of this year’s Classic) in a loss so epic one may as well call it a transference of Winter Classic powers. [Ed: Or put more succinctly, the visitor in the Winter Classic has made the Finals every year so far -- and lost every year so far.]
6. Philly has stupid Pronger face and haven’t had a goaltender to get behind since Hextall.
7. Byfuglien is really fun to say phonetically, and will likely be a word Leighton is reading over and over while in net.

Chicago will win in 5. And if they don’t, I’m blaming it on the Conklin Curse.

Though I do look forward to Byfuglien knocking out Pronger’s teeth.

	6	2	3	3	7	4	4
	5	1	4	5	4	3	2

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-2	4-1	4-2	4-2	4-3
4-3	4-2	4-2	4-1	4-3
4-2	4-3	4-1	4-3	4-1
4-2	4-2	4-3	4-1	4-2
1-3	3-1	0-4	2-2	W-L
10	7	15	10	GO
6-6	9-3	4-8	6-6	W-L
28	20	31	28	GO

Actually, to be perfectly fair, Matt’s picks were identical to those of one Robert McKenzie, so it’s a bit unexpected to see things blow up that badly. Also, given how Boston-Philly turned out, I actually don’t feel totally bad. I mean, if at any point the Bruins had pulled their heads out of their asses and stolen a game, it’s much more even down the stretch. As it is, Hoop has essentially won by default, Matt has been mathematically eliminated, and Gerard and I are playing for second prize. Still, as a lapsed Canadiens fan, I can’t complain about the outcome too terribly much, except to say that I’d rather have seen the 33^rd installment of Habs-Bruins, and third in a row, simply as an expression of sheer cosmic will that these two teams face each other all the fucking time.

Who will win the Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny out West (or as many cynics have called it, “The real Stanley Cup Final”)? Who will win the skirt-tearing slap fight of Cinderella teams out East? Answers to these questions, and many more, after the jump.

Your Stanley Cup finalists are Philadelphia and Chicago. Series starts Saturday. Go Hawks.

Wales Conference Final

(7) Philadelphia vs. (8) Montreal

Playoff History: This will be the sixth meeting all-time between the Flyers and the Habs, and the fourth to decide who plays for the Cup. Most recently, the Flyers knocked off the top-ranked Habs in just five second-round games, based in no small part on the poor showing of Carey Price.

1973 SF	1976 SCF	1987 CF	1989 CF	2008 CSF
4-1	4-0	4-2	4-2	4-1

Last Time They Were Here: For Philly, just a couple of years ago after they beat the Habs, only to get ousted by Pittsburgh in five. For Montreal, it was 1993, when they creamed the Cinderella Islanders in five games.

Season Series: Tied 2-2, all in regulation with Montreal winning the first and last meetings.

Doogie Says: Part of me kind of wants to puss out and take a pass on this one, because really, how do you pick between two Cinderella teams? I mean, really, what’s your poison? The team riding an absurdly hot goalie and winger, which has played all 14 games, and has a defence full of walking wounded, and has offed the President’s Trophy winners and the defending Stanley Cup champions? Or the team with half their top six on the DL or playing through serious injury, which just completed the greatest comeback in professional sport, as only three other teams in the history of North American pro sport have ever accomplished, and did so for the most part with their third-string goalie? How the hell do you make that kind of choice?

Well, since looking at stats is probably useless at this point, you go back through history, look for patterns, and make an educated guess. I stated in the comments to the last predictions post that I think the 2010 Canadiens look superficially an awful lot like the 2003 Anaheim Mighty Ducks, at least in terms of accomplishment and method thereof, so figure on Hal Gill to ride Simon Gagne back onto the IR and little Danny Briere right into the ice, Halak to continue to make Big Saves, and Cammalleri to continue his assault on the record books. Habs in six.

Hoop Says: Both teams are incredible stories this year in the post season. Philly was the first team in 35 years to come back from 3-0 down. While Montreal has taken out the President’s Trophy winners and the defending Stanley Cup Champions. When I look at this matchup it boils down to one major difference to me and that is goaltending. Michael Leighton did not look sharp in game 7 and was fortunate that his team came back. In fairness it takes time to get your feel back after a long injury. However that is time Leighton will not have, while Jaroslav Halak has been the MVP of the playoffs I don’t see that changing. Montreal in 6.

Matt Says: Had this been the MON-BOS series I was expecting after the Habs moved on, I would have went back to my roots as a hockey fan, but while Halak has been amazing, I think they’re going to get beat down by Philly. Besides, when as Montreal ever relied on a (pseudo-)rookie goalie to get anywhere? Flyers in six.

Gerard Says: Did you know that the winner of the last two Winter Classics lost the Cup in the Finals? That would likely have continued without the epic FAIL of Boston Friday night. But since that train got broken by the loser of this year’s Winter Classic…oh, fuck it. If Philly wins this series, that means Chicago will win the Cup. But that can’t happen, because of Hossa [ed: See below]. Montreal in 7.

Wait a sec…did I just predict the Habs to win the Cup? Madness. See Boston? This is what you reduce me to.

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

Postmortem: You know, I had a bad feeling about my Montreal pick, and I even expressed some reservations on the admin forum, but I couldn’t place it, and I figured since the Habs had done away with two teams vastly superior, on paper, to the Flyers, they should be able to overcome some stylistic differences over the course of the series. Then CBC put up a graphic during game one that flipped the switch: “No team has ever won two Game 7s and gone on to win a third series.”

Oh. Oh, fuck. Well, never mind, then.

While the series likely would’ve looked different with a healthy Andrei Markov, the bottom line is, the Habs looked tired. Their plays in both ends of the rink were sloppy, their attention to detail, their awareness, was gone, and they lost probably 80% of the puck battles and races outside of Game 3. Meanwhile, Leighton out-Halaked Halak, putting up three shutouts in a series for the first time since Marty Turco blanked the Canucks three times in 2007 (bizarrely, Turco’s Stars lost that series, anyway: they couldn’t win a single game without him posting a clean sheet). Plus, unlike most teams in playoff history, the Flyers actually got healthier. After getting Gagne back in the Boston series, they added Ian Laperriere and Jeff Carter in Game 4, and they were both solid contributors, in their respective ways, to Game 5, with two blocked shots for Laperriere and two goals for Carter. Still, I have to think they’re in tough against a Chicago team that dispatched the Red Wings and Sharks in a total of nine games. Meanwhile, congratulations to the Canadiens for reaching the semifinals for the first time since ’93, causing the experts to tear their hair out for a month and a half trying to figure you out in the process.

Campbell Conference Final

(1) San Jose vs. (2) Chicago

Playoff History: None. By the time the Sharks shook off their expansion shittiness, Chicago was on the verge of turning into hot garbage for about twelve years.

Last Time They Were Here: For the Sharks, their only prior appearance in the conference final was in 2004, when they hocked up the first two games at home against Calgary and ultimately lost in six, thus birthing a legend of playoff chokery. The Hawks, meanwhile, were here just last year, getting shown up by the Red Wings in five.

Season Series: 3-1 Chicago, with a pair of OT wins and a pretty sound clobbering at the Tank to their credit.

Doogie Says: This series is difficult to call for an entirely different reason than the Wales final is. While the Wales final consists of two teams that were kind of bad during the regular season but who got hot at the right time, the Campbell final consists of two teams who were pretty much expected to be here. San Jose has defied expectations simply by showing up here, after so many years of disappointment, while Chicago seems to be right on schedule in their development. Rest vs. Rust probably isn’t a huge factor at this point — and probably wouldn’t be beyond the first ten minutes anyway — since both teams have been off for days. That also means they’ve had time to rest up what bumps and bruises they have. In looking desperately for an advantage, I eventually turned up the following justifications: a) a slightly tougher road to the conference finals, b) the appearance of slightly better depth, and c) if you want to use the tables from here, better 5-on-5 and score-tied play throughout the year, and d) the season series. As last one should make clear, I’m going with my initial gut reaction of Hawks in six.

Hoop Says: The Sharks have been rolling even since the game 3 OT loss to Colorado in the 1st round. My concern with San Jose is who have they beaten? A Colorado team that was just happy to make the playoffs and a Detroit Red Wings team that had been worn down with a rookie goaltender that was incredibly lucky to get by an average Phoenix Coyotes squad. While Chicago got lucky in round 1 against Nashville, they really took the game to Vancouver in the 2nd round and showed their depth. The depth will likely be the deciding factor here so I am taking the Hawks. Chicago in 6.

Matt Says: I was wishing the Sharks would get buried by the Avalanche, and I honestly figured that the Wings wouldn’t have that much trouble with them, but they started swimming straight. I’m still not sure about them though, so it should be long, and definitely drawn out, but one of these times, the Sharks have to sink, right? Hawks in seven.

Gerard Says: Chicago will win in 7 games. Why? Hossa has been in the last 2 finals and has caught “Conklin Fever” (Conklin having been on the losing team in the finals 3 of the last 4 seasons while losing in the conference final the other season) having lost the cup the last 2 years.

	1	2	2	2	0
	2	4	3	4	4

Postmortem: A bit of a surprising result, not in terms of who won (note that we all had the Hawks), but in how quickly they’d do it. The series score paints a deceptive picture, though: the Sharks scored the first goal in three of the games, all of which ended in one (non-EN) goal victories for Chicago. Even when the ‘Hawks played like dog turd, as they did for the first half of Game 4, they still found a way to flip the switch when the time was right and get the goals they needed. I’m not sure if that’s more of a credit to the ‘Hawks or a deficit for the Sharks: it didn’t seem to be like they were playing badly, they just got straight-up beat by a better team. And now that better team is going on to face a team that made the playoffs on the last day, by a shootout goal, but which also staged one of the greatest comebacks in pro sport history and handily dispatched the presumed Cinderellas of 2010. They’ll have their hands full, but if this series is any indication, I don’t see any reason why the Flyers should present more than a temporary problem for these ‘Hawks. It took a while to rev ‘em up, but now that they’re going at full power, this club is a buzzsaw.

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

Matt and Gerard were comically late getting their entries to me, so this goes up mere minutes before the start of the playoffs. But it’s on time! Improvement from last year! After the jump, let’s see some predictions…

Not really much to say about tonight’s game that hasn’t been said already. The Caps’ stars left their gameplan in a bin, and all tried to do it all themselves. The Habs block a million shots, Halak stops the other million, and it’s 2-1 for the bleu, blanc, et rouge over the red, white, and blue.

Conference semis start tomorrow. We’re on the clock, gentlemen.

Eastern Conference Quarterfinals

(1) Washington vs. (8) Montreal

Playoff History: None. Most of the years where both teams have actually been good enough to make the playoffs together came during the divisional era, when it would’ve been very tough for them to meet anyway.

Previously On…Survivor: The Caps dropped in seven to the Penguins in the conference semis, while Montreal bowed out in four to the Bruins in the first round.

Season Series: Surprisingly, tied 2-2. Even more surprisingly, the team with the most skills competition wins in this series is Washington (1): the Habs won both of theirs during real hockey (one regulation and one OT).

Doogie Says: This is being touted as one of those series that “could” end in upset. Sure, if Client Jaroslav Halak stands on his head (fun fact: the Habs are the second-worst team in the East at getting outshot by playoff teams), the midgets find a way to best both Jose Theodore and Semyon Varlamov (one is more likely than the other), and if the Canadiens don’t fall asleep trying to maintain slavish devotion to The System by Jacques Martin, it’s possible. Hell, given the number of 6-5 games these two clubs have played the last couple of years, they may even be able to outgun them. But given the way they backed into the playoffs — had they not gotten that loser point from Toronto in Game 82, they’re watching both the Flyers and Rangers do post-season battle from a golf course in Ile Bizard — and the fact that their best power-play sniper is the injured Glen Metropolit, and just given the fact that they lost in overtime to fucking Toronto for Christ’s sake, this is a team going nowhere fast. They can steal a game, maybe even two, but an upset? So not happening. Capitals in five.

Hoop Says: Is there any reason other than hope to think that the Canadiens can hold off the Caps? No. Capitals in 5.

Matt Says: Backing into the playoffs is never a good thing. Capitals in 5.

Gerard Says: Caps in 6, because the Habs have played them surprisingly tight this year.

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

Postmortem: Remember how I said that I really didn’t think it was possible for Montreal to limit Washington’s chances to the point where the Habs’ stars could keep up with the Caps’ stars, because of how shitty they’d been down the stretch? Yeah, yeah, I think the entire hockey world outside of Montreal fell for that. A large portion of this victory goes to Jaroslav “.978 SVP in Games 5-7″ Halak, who will also rightfully get most of the press, but a bunch of the credit also goes to the defence that laid down in front of a good chunk of the 26 shots blocked per game on average and did an excellent job limiting Alex Ovechkin’s opportunities in particular — Spacek and Gill in particular were in Ovechkin’s face seemingly every time he came in on the rush. Heck, the Habs’ PK was at least partially focused around stopping Ovechkin and letting the rest of the team play catch and try to adapt, and they did so with aplomb, to the tune of 32/33 or 97.0% efficiency. I’m not convinced Halak or the Habs will be able to replicate this feat against Pittsburgh, because it’s just so unlikely, but maybe for tonight I should turn off my rationality and let myself be a fan for the first time in a while: you’re wrong more often, but it’s usually a lot more fun.

As an aside, I should really point out that John Carlson — hero of the World Juniors for the United States in Saskatoon this past Christmas — had a whale of a series, and Karl Alzner didn’t look out of place in his G7 call-up. The future of Washington’s defence is bright, and I bet we see both of them in the regular lineup next October.

(2) New Jersey vs. (7) Philadelphia

Playoff History: You would think these two would’ve met frequently in the divisional period, but the Devils were garbage for the first half and Philly was garbage for the second half of that time, so no dice. The Flyers do account for the only playoff series in Colorado Rockies history, though. They also played a couple of high-profile conference finals in the inter-lockout period, both ending in New Jersey Stanley Cups.

1978 PRE	1995 CF	2000 CF	2004 CQF
2-0	4-2	4-3	4-1

Previously On…Survivor: The Devils were stunned by the Whalercanes in seven in the opening round last year, while Philly was less stunned by Pittsburgh in six in that same round.

Season Series: Figure this out: Philly’s 5-1 against Jersey this year. A couple of them were even decisive. I had no idea.

Doogie Says: Philadelphia’s problem for as long as I’ve been alive, it seems, has been goaltending. They tried once again to fill the gap left by the crazy outline of Ron Hextall trying to murder Chris Chelios on the ice over twenty years ago with Ray Emery. Unfortunately, he seems to have ripped up every structure attached to his pelvic girdle and may never play again. Seriously. This has led to a game of musical chairs in the crease, as goalies continually drop like Spinal Tap drummers until only Brian Boucher remains. Philly’s goal differential has slowly been sliding downward the last little while, and while Jersey had their struggles for a while this year, with Marty playing less like Marty than we’re accustomed to during the middle portion of the season and Jamie Langenbrunner seemingly on the outs with Jacques Lemaire, but the Devils have actually been rolling the last little while, provided they actually score (the Devils have been held to two goals or fewer in nine of their last twenty, including being shut out by the lowly Oilers). Besides, the second round is where the latter day Devils tend to fall apart, as Marty suddenly buckles under the weight of another 90-game season. For this round, it’ll last longer than it probably should, because damned if the Flyers aren’t tenacious, opportunistic bastards, but Devils in seven.

Hoop Says: Martin Brodeur vs Brian Boucher: who would you take? Ignore the regular season record. Devils in 6.

Matt Says: I’m going to have to side with Hoop on this one: I think Brodeur will be the difference. Devils in 6.

Gerard Says: Flyers in 6.

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

Postmortem: Clearly, I should’ve listened to the nagging doubts I had about Jersey’s ability to consistently generate offence, especially given the season series against Philly. (Wonder how this’ll affect Ilya Kovalchuk’s free agent marketability?) Still, who knew that Brian Boucher would rediscover the game he had ten years ago in this series? I really did not think he’d be the better goaltender, and it’s not like he stole the series or anything, either.

(3) Buffalo vs. (6) Boston

Playoff History: The Adams Division says hi.

1982 DSF	1983 DF	1988 DSF	1989 DSF	1992 DSF	1993 DSF	1999 CSF
3-1	4-3	4-2	4-1	4-3	4-0	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: The Bruins lost to the Whalercanes in overtime of Game 7 last year, while the Sabres haven’t seen the inside of the postseason since their last division title in 2007. Which may be why I’ve forgotten how ugly that fucking slug is.

Season Series: 4-2 Bruins, albeit with one shootout victory in there. Also, four of the six games were decided by one goal, and the other two were decided by two.

Doogie Says: The Bruins are another trendy underdog pick because of the absurd numbers Tuukka Rask put up this season, reminding some of Miikka Kiprusoff circa 2004. I would probably be tempted to take them as well, but no Marc Savard means the Bruins are in a world of trouble offensively. Yes, they won the season series, but most of those games came before Matt Cooke ended Savard’s season, and I have no faith in Boston’s popgun offence — the last to 200 goals this season — to be able to beat another Vezina candidate in Ryan Miller. While Buffalo’s got some injury woes of their own right now, though Connolly and Hecht are expected back for Game 1, I think they started out in a better position, in terms of depth. There will be a lot of 2-1 and 3-2 games here, but in the end, it’s the Sabres in six.

Hoop Says: Divisional matchups in the playoffs are always the most frightening. Chara is the difference. Bruins in 6.

Matt Says: I didn’t really watch much of the Sabres this year, so obviously, this goes to the team with the better commercials. Bruins in 5.

Gerard Says: Buffalo in 7. Looking at the season series, I think the East is gonna be a lot tighter than everyone thinks.

	2	3	1	2	4	3	2
	1	5	2	3	1	4	4

Postmortem: What do you know, I totally underestimated the Savard-less Bruins. I really didn’t think that scoring by committee was going to work out, but it proved to be enough behind Tuukka Rask’s goaltending. I would suggest that the Bruins are probably still boned against the Pens, but if Montreal wins their series, it’s Boston-Philly, and that’s a much better matchup.

(4) Pittsburgh vs. (5) Ottawa

Playoff History: The closest thing we have to an, “oh, not you assholes again,” matchup. They’ve met twice in the last three years, with this being the rubber match. The victor in each series, incidentally, went on to lose in the Stanley Cup Finals.

2007 CQF	2008 CQF
4-1	4-0

Previously On…Survivor: The Penguins, you may have heard, won the Stanley Cup last year. Ottawa did not. Their last trip to the playoffs, though, did end in a Senator scoring the Cup-winning goal: Chris Phillips into his own net, Steve Smith-style, against Anaheim in 2007.

Season Series: Tied 2-2. Bizarrely, no game was decided by fewer than three goals.

Doogie Says: I have no faith in the Senators. Take away that eleven-game winning streak, and they’re just another bad bubble team in an Eastern Conference full of them. They have the worst goal differential of the playoff pool by quite a bit, and Pittsburgh is deeper and better at every position. This is another series that shouldn’t, and won’t, be close. Penguins in five.

Hoop Says: I know the Sens are a sexy upset pick. But really Pittsburgh is the better team. Penguins in 5.

Matt Says: I think Ottawa will manages to put up a fight, but overall, I don’t see them winning. Penguins in 6.

Gerard Says: Jesus Christ. Every Pens-Sens game this year has been a blowout and they each took two. Let’s say Pens in…7.

	4	2	4	7	3	4	4
	5	1	2	4	4	3	2

Postmortem: Thanks to that noted goalscorer Matt Carkner and a heroic effort in net by Pascal Leclaire, we got an extra game between these two. The biggest surprise isn’t so much that Crosby dominated the series, but that he finished with fourteen points in five games (he was held pointless in Game 6). I’m not sure I want to be Boston or Montreal, whomever faces Pittsburgh in Round 2: with both Crosby and Malkin going, and the depth contributing, these guys are as dangerous as ever.

Western Conference Quarterfinals

(1) San Jose vs. (8) Colorado

Playoff History: Three close series, though two of them came when Colorado was scary good.

1999 CQF	2002 CSF	2004 CSF
4-2	4-3	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: San Jose got embarrassed — again — by the Ducks in the first round, while Colorado decided to take a spin at the draft lottery. Well played, Colorado.

Season Series: Tied 2-2, with one Colorado win coming during Percentagepalooza on opening night, and one coming in the shootout.

Doogie Says: Sorry, Matt, but your team is all kinds of no good at all. They’re the only playoff team in the West to get outshot (and handily so) by non-playoff teams, yet they posted a massive goal differential against them, confirming my season-long observation that they’re riding percentages like a mechanical bull. Sure, San Jose’s got issues — I don’t trust Nabokov as far as I can throw him, for example — but this is not the time for those issues to rear their ugly heads. When the Sharks face better competition in Round Two, they’re going to be in trouble, but if there’s a weak sister in this bunch, it’s Colorado with a bullet. Sharks in four.

Hoop Says: Will San Jose find yet another way to collapse in the first round? Doubt it. Colorado is out of gas, Sharks in 6.

Matt Says: Despite what I may have said above, I’ve got to go with my team and their penchant for winning games they shouldn’t. Avalanche in 6.

Gerard Says: The season series is 2-2. The Sharks have a history of choking. Heatley and Thornton disappear in the playoffs. Marleau has a career year and Colorado’s goaltending can steal games. Given a seven-game series, Colorado is younger (will tire less) and less prone to arrogance (they’re surprisingly old for their ages). Colorado is going to take this. Mark my words. MARK THEM! Avalanche in 6.

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

Postmortem: Two Colorado wins due to pucks going off of San Jose D in OT or late in the third, and a whole lot of Craig Anderson being otherworldly. But really, we knew all season that Anderson was the only reason Colorado was within a country mile of the playoffs: the only question is, why didn’t I take that into account in making this prediction? Boy, was that short-sighted.

(2) Chicago vs. (7) Nashville

Playoff History: None. Nashville’s still new at this playoffs thing.

Previously On…Survivor: The Hawks got shown up pretty good by the Red Wings in the conference finals, 4-1, while Nashville just barely missed the dance.

Season Series: 4-2 Chicago, all in regulation, and all before New Year’s.

Doogie Says: Poor Nashville. Every year, they enter the playoffs (or come close), have such high hopes, then they run into a good team, put up a valiant fight, but ultimately for naught. That being said, I don’t expect them to go down without a fight, simply because Chicago’s goaltending is prone to nights of epic collapse seemingly without reason. But while goaltending could cost Chicago the Stanley Cup, it won’t cost them against Nashville, because their offence just isn’t good enough — Patric Horqvist came out of nowhere to score 30 goals, but there’s only two guys with more than 50 points — and their special teams are just plain bad (16.4% PP, 24th; 77.1% PK, 28th). It is interesting to note, however, that despite their offensive juggernaut status, Chicago actually has a pretty middling power play themselves, at 17.7% (16th), but a solid PK at 85.3% (4th). However you want to look at it, though, even given Chicago’s weaknesses, I don’t think Nashville is capable of exploiting them. This series will go on longer an anyone expects, but ultimately, the guys you expect to prevail will. Blackhawks in seven.

Hoop Says: The Preds will give the Hawks all they can handle. But Chicago is too deep. Hawks in 6.

Matt Says: Chicago. Still scary. Hawks in 6.

Gerard Says: Chicago in 4.

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

Postmortem: Fourteen seconds. The Predators were fourteen seconds from taking their first-ever 3-2 lead in this series, but a Patrick Kane shorthanded goal, followed by a Marian Hossa OT winner (after he’d been assessed a major — figure that out) led to the same old script playing out in Music City. It’s too bad, because Nashville gave the Blackhawks everything they could handle throughout the series, at least when they weren’t on that anemic excuse of a power play. I feel really bad for Preds fans, honestly: they keep getting teased, then having their hearts mercilessly broken by usually-superior teams. It’s like being an Oilers fan in the ’90s, really. Hopefully, they find their Marchant goal someday soon.

(3) Vancouver vs. (6) Los Angeles

Playoff History: Towel Power propelled the Canucks to the Finals in ’82, while Gretzky propelled the Kings to victory in ’91 and ’93. Since then, bupkis. (Since then, the Kings have missed the playoffs far more often than not.)

1982 DF	1991 DSF	1993 DF
4-1	4-2	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: The Canucks collapsed against Chicago in the conference semis, losing 4-2, while LA hasn’t been to the post-season since Britney Spears was only driven crazy by a dude in a song. (Too old of a joke?)

Season Series: 3-1 Vancouver, with one win in the shootout. Those three wins, though, came in the first half of the season, while LA’s single win came just two weeks ago, to the tune of 8-3. Not that it’s predictive of much, but…

Doogie Says: I want the Kings to advance. Really, I do. I still like Ryan Smyth, and I still don’t like…well, pretty much anyone on the Canucks. And their fans are still complete fucking douchebags. Scott Reynolds at C&B presents some decent evidence to suggest the Kings can pull off the upset, too. But I can’t believe that Luongo’s going to continue to stink like he has, though Hockey Night in Canada‘s preview show did suggest that the loss of Willie Mitchell might be the difference. Plus, Vancouver’s got one of the deepest offences out there, with six 25-goal scorers. For some reason, I have a hunch LA will keep it close — I actually like their defence quite a bit, all things considered — but I can’t see them pulling the upset like some have predicted. Canucks in seven.

Hoop Says: This will be a learning experience for the Kings. Too much talent in Vancouver. Canucks in 5.

Matt Says: The evil part of me wants to see the Canucks get swept [ed: "Evil?" Nay, sir, the civilized side of you.], but I think this one will be a long series. Canucks in 6.

Gerard Says: LA in 7.

	3	2	3	6	7	4	4
	2	3	5	4	2	2	2

Postmortem: Boy, if not for Vancouver’s PK laying the biggest egg in playoff history through four games (what were they at, 40% at one point?), this series probably isn’t even close. Certainly, once they got their shit together and Luongo started playing like Luongo, they became the team I expected to see going into things. But while everyone talks about the Sedins, Mikael Samuelsson, the Detroit castoff, the guy who was left off Team Sweden at the Olympics then promptly told his national ice hockey federation to go fuck themselves, leads playoff scoring with seven goals in six games. I mean, look, I’ve got him in my regular-season pool, so I know what he can do, but what the hell?

(4) Phoenix Arizona vs. (5) Detroit

Playoff History: The Detroit Red Wings terminated the existence of the Winnipeg Jets on April 28, 1996, with a 4-1 victory at Winnipeg Arena. The two franchises also met in 1998, a year the Wings won the Stanley Cup.

1996 CQF	1998 CQF
4-2	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: Detroit made their second straight Stanley Cup Finals, losing to Pittsburgh in seven. The Coyotes haven’t made the playoffs since Brit–wait, I already did that one. Shit. Um, let’s just say it’s been a while.

Season Series: Tied 2-2. Phoenix required OT (but oddly, not a shootout) to win both of theirs, while both of Detroit’s were taken in regulation.

Doogie Says: First, regarding that little name change at the top, it should be pointed out that it seems all but assured this team will be called the Arizona Coyotes next year, unless the NHL has a complete conniption fit over it (unlikely) or decides in favour of “Glendale Coyotes” instead (riiiiiight), so we might as well get used to it now. Anyway, I had high hopes for the Coyotes running into someone like LA or Nashville, because I’m pretty sure they could handle either of those teams; the one team I was afraid of was Detroit, and wouldn’t you know it, they win out while LA gets owned by Devan Dubnyk, and here we are. Detroit is only this low because of all the injuries they sustained to basically every player of note in the first half. Once everyone came back, they played like the Detroit Red Wings, and I expect nothing less in this series. It should also be pointed out that Phoenix led the League with a whopping 14-6 record in the shootout, and as we’ve seen from past experience, that shit never holds up, and more to the point, is totally irrelevant to the playoffs. Ilya Bryzgalov is a hell of a goalie, and will keep the Desert Dogs in it, but Detroit is Detroit, and once again, it seems unlikely that anyone in their path will be able to stop them. Red Wings in six.

Hoop Says: Phoenix will keep a couple games close but the Wings are in fine form. Red Wings in 5.

Matt Says: I don’t know if I like Detroit’s chances this year. Let’s go with the mongrels. Coyotes in 7.

Gerard Says: Detroit in 6.

	3	4	4	0	1	5	1	3
	2	7	2	3	4	2	6	4

Postmortem: This was, in one sense, a very opportunistic series. When Detroit started looking old and tired, and when Jimmy Howard started playing like a rookie goaltender in the playoffs, the Coyotes were able to exploit it. When Phoenix got sloppy (Game 2) or nervous (Game 7), as young teams do, the Red Wings were the Red Wings, as they ever were. The story of the series, though, might be special teams. In their three wins, the Coyotes were 6/13; in their four losses, they were 1/20. Detroit, meanwhile, was 2/16 in their three losses and 5/18 in their four wins. The contrast is less stark for Detroit, mind you, and the ineptitude of Phoenix’s power play, much like Nashville, really hurt them when it counted: they failed to convert on a 5-on-3 late in the second period of Game 7 when the score was only 3-1, then Brad Stuart came out of the box and scored on a breakaway to put it on ice. It’s too bad, though, that Shane Doan was unable to return, because that could have made for a more even game, particularly early, and a much more interesting conclusion, especially since the Coyotes were able to win two of three with Doan in the lineup and pushed Detroit to seven even without him. I think Detroit may be more vulnerable than they’ve been in past years, because of Howard’s inconsistency and the aging of some of their stars, especially on defence, but clearly, when the vets are on, as they were in Game 7, they’re still one of the most dangerous teams in hockey. The Sharks will have their hands full.