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

Khabibulin for Vezina.

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

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

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

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
4-2	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

After a lot of thinking, I’m beginning to feel like they’re right, at least to some degree, for a couple of reasons. For one, the talent disparity that we used to see in evidence whenever the Montreal Canadiens played, say, the Kansas City Scouts is largely gone. Yes, at the extremes, there’s still a clear difference between good and bad — anyone who’s seen a Blackhawks-Oilers game in the last two years can attest to that — but on an average night, the difference between two teams is much more granular than it’s ever been. Part of that is due to improved scouting, as teams scour not just the wilds of Canadian junior, but European junior and pro leagues, American college and high-school, and even occasionally (though all-too-rarely) Canadian university hockey. Good players are everywhere, and while you can question the decision-making and efficency of some teams, there’s no question that most of the stones are at least getting turned over, and that there’s talent to be found under every one of them. There’s also the fact that coaching, athletic training, and psychological training are much better now than they’ve ever been. Players get feedback on what they did wrong, can see the video of the error for themselves, and know what to do for next time. Guys can spend a dozen hours or more per week in the gym, building their aerobic base and their strength. Players learn how to deal with hostile crowds, can talk to trained professionals about their confidence and about off-ice issues that can prove to be a distraction. All of this leads to the average NHLer being much more skilled, fit, and resilient than they’ve ever been, and there’s much less disparity between the best and worst in at least the last two categories — and arguably the first, as well — than we’ve ever seen. And then, of course, we have the redistribution of talent brought about by the salary cap, which teams are still learning the ins and outs of five years later. All of this leads to a situation where it’s much more likely that the outcome of a game, for example, can hinge on a fortuitous bounce one way or the other, because on any given night, there’s not that much to choose from, relative to 30 or 40 years ago.

The other main reason is that high-level hockey seems to be a barely-controlled chaotic system, which I think is a product of the way the game’s developed over the last half-century or so. In that time, we’ve seen the introduction of the slap shot, drastic changes to goalie equipment and play style, meaningful east-west play, heavy shot-blocking, composite sticks, and mid-air redirection of the puck as an intentional play, to name just a few things. Many of these changes come in a sort of delayed chain-reaction. Slap shots begat changes in goalie equipment. Changes in goalie equipment combined with the butterfly style led to much more shot-tipping. The evolution of the modern east-west game — not just skating up and down your lanes, but cutting across the ice and creating holes through both skating and puck movement — started by the Winnipeg Jets of the 1970s and perfected by the Edmonton Oilers of the 1980s, made it difficult to play man-to-man defence, especially for the more lumbering brutes of the defensive trade, necessitating more shot- and pass-blocking, from all members of the lineup. Combine these changes with worsening ice conditions — especially in warmer climes and during the latter stages of the playoffs, as the weather gets warmer everywhere — and increased overall athleticism — leading not only to faster players and more violent collisions, but more abuse to the aforementioned ice through the course of a game — and the puck winds up spending much of its time hopping here, there, and everywhere, rolling, flipping, on end, what have you. Sometimes unpredictable things happen like, say, the puck hitting a rut on its way in from centre ice and hopping over a goalie’s glove, or a puck pinballing in off three sets of legs in front of the net. At a certain point, physics takes over and there’s little you can do to predict it.

All of which leads me to last night’s game between the Hitmen and the Spitfires. Sure, it ended 6-2 Windsor, and appeared for all the world, from the boxscore, to be the coronation of the first Memorial Cup repeat in 15 years. If they can abuse the only team that appeared to be any real competition to them going in, what hope does anyone else have? Except when you actually watch the game, it becomes clear that bounces played a huge role in the final outcome. The first Windsor goal came off a Michael Stone shot-block: the puck bounced just under his ankle, in the tiny space that was there, and fooled Martin Jones. The second, just a minute or so later, deflected off the stick of a backchecking Ben Wilson. It’s 2-0 five minutes in, a hole from which the Hitmen never recovered, but it was off two unfortunate bounces. From there, I felt it was actually a fairly evenly-played game, with both teams getting their share of the bounces: a shot that rang off both posts behind Martin Jones and out at one end, a tip by Matt MacKenzie going two inches wide because the puck started rolling mid-pass at the other, and so forth. A ton of close calls that could’ve been in or out, based on ever-so-slight variances in human performance — so small as to be irreproducable — or the condition of the ice or what have you. From the four-minute mark of the first to the 19-minute mark of the third, the balance of scoring was 3-2 Windsor. That was the game I saw, and that game in no way resembled the 6-2 final scoreline.

Sure, some nights a team gets outplayed, full stop…but others, the bounces go the other guys’ way and obscure the balance of play. Maybe I’m being a blinkered fan here, and maybe I’m not lending enough credence to score effects, but what I saw last night was a team that could compete with the best in major junior, that suffered just a couple of breakdowns, but otherwise played an admirable road game without their best forward. If they play Windsor again on Sunday, with Brandon Kozun healthy enough to play, I see no reason to think that they can’t win the Memorial Cup. That doesn’t mean that they will, of course, but it does mean that the gap between the Windsor Spitfires and the Calgary Hitmen is not what yesterday’s score would have you believe.

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

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

So yeah. I didn’t actually post anything on the conference final this time around, partially due to illness, and partially due to finals. My bad. I’ll make up for it a little here before looking at the stats and figures for the Ed Chynoweth Cup Final (silent “E” in Chynoweth, apparently) between Calgary and Tri-City.

To be honest, I didn’t really expect the Hitmen to win this series. I mean, I guess you shouldn’t be surprised when the regular season champions earn a berth in the League final for the second consecutive year, but at the same time, these Wheaties were the highest-scoring team in the Dub by 45 goals, they had five players in the top 20 in League scoring (Calgary had only League scoring champ Brandon Kozun), and they were hosting the Memorial Cup, and when was the last time a Memorial Cup host went out before the League final? Plus, Brandon had seriously had our number, to the tune of 3-0-1 in four games this year, with the only loss being a SOL in the first game of the year. They owned us. There was no cause for optimism, no real reason to believe that things would change. I mean, just look at how the NHL playoffs have turned out, at least through the first round: even the upsets have at least made sense when you look at the season series.

I think the turning point might have been when Ian Schultz scored the OT winner in Game 2. To that point, the Wheat Kings had been the demonstrably better team, yet Martin Jones had finally started to put on the kind of goaltending performance we’d been expecting all playoff. Then in Game 3, despite outshooting the Hitmen 21-10, the Wheaties emerged from the first period down 4-0! While Matt Calvert scored a natural hat trick shorthanded in the second period (!!) to make it close, the Hitmen were able to regroup and earn the 6-3 victory with their best period of the series to that point. In Game 4, it was a similar story, this time with the Hitmen going down 2-0 early then clawing their way back with four consecutive goals before Brenden Walker made it a nail-biter late. In Games 3 and 4, there were times when the Wheat Kings looked like the dominant team I expected, but then there were times when they looked decidedly average, like they were expecting things to fall into place for them as a matter of their talent, much like the Hitmen seemed to at times during their series last year. While Calgary also had their decidedly lacklustre moments in both games, Martin Jones held them in when they maybe didn’t deserve it, then timely goals from Tyler Fiddler (two goals in 0:19 in Game 3, the latter into an empty net) and Kris Foucault (two goals in 1:36 in Game 4) helped carry them to victory. Finally, in Game 5, a game I expected Brandon to pull out all the stop for, the Hitmen played their most complete, dominant game of the entire playoffs, and arguably the entire season. They outshot the Wheat Kings 27-12 and outscored them 3-0 through two periods, partially due to a horrendously untimely and costly Toni Rajala penalty (recapped by yours truly in the comments here) but mostly due to sound fundamentals in all three zones. When co-captains Matt Calvert and Brayden Schenn took matching misconducts 68 game seconds apart, you knew there would be no returning from this hole, that frustration had overriden all good sense this Wheat Kings team had, and that against all expectations, the Hitmen would not only oust the Brandon wheat Kings, but do so in their shortest series to date in these playoffs, at just five games.

So now we look forward to the Tri-City Americans, a team I don’t think I’ve ever seen in person, now that I think about it. Actually, wait, I have. I’m looking at the game sheet, and I remember Pechurskiy playing that game because it was right after he’d mopped up for the Penguins when they got shellacked by the Canucks in Vancouver on Hockey Night. But other than that and their snazzy logo (and weird jerseys with the stripe curling around under the arms and back behind the nameplate — you have to see it, I guess), I got nothin’. While the WHL’s official site breaks it down over here, let’s take a gander at the relevant stats:

• First, the special teams. Regular season ranks out of all 22 WHL teams; playoff ranks amongst all 16 teams and amongst the final eight, to alleviate some of the sample size problems created by teams ousted in the first round.
  • Calgary Regular Season: 29.0% PP (1st), 87.5% PK (1st)
  • Tri-City Regular Season: 28.0% PP (2nd), 78.5% PK (15th)
  • Calgary Playoff: 23.9% PP (8th/4th), 82.0% PK (3rd/1st)
  • Tri-City Playoff: 28.6% PP (4th/1st), 78.8% PK (7th/5th)

  Both teams have a killer PP, though TC’s been better in the playoffs, but the Hitmen have a decidedly better penalty kill in both the regular season and playoffs. Slight advantage Calgary.

• Tri-City scored 272 (3rd) and allowed 193 (4th), while Calgary scored 269 (4th) and allowed 177 (2nd). Calgary finished 52-17-3 (107 pts, 1st overall) while Tri-City finished 47-22-3 (97 pts, T-4th overall). Advantage Calgary.
• Tri-City keeper Drew Owley has put up outstanding numbers, ranking first amongst playoff goalies with at least 180 minutes played at 2.14/0.931; Calgary’s Martin Jones put up 2.61/0.905, which while not completely inspiring, is much better than it was. In the regular season, on the other hand, Jones led the League with a 2.21 GAA and was 4th with a 0.919 SVP; Osley had a 2.51 and 0.918 (both 5th). Let’s call this slight advantage Tri-City, though again, Jones has come on stronger lately.
• Brandon Kozun led the WHL in scoring with 32-75-107 in the regular season, and leads with 7-19-26 through three rounds of the playoffs. Tri-City’s lone regular season entrant into the Top 20 was Brendan Shinnimin (27-55-82, 14th), and he now places 3rd on the playoff list with 8-14-22, just behind Kozun and recently-eliminated Craig Cunningham of Vancouver. The Hitmen and Americans each have four entrants in the Top 20 in playoff scoring, though all four of Tri-City’s top scorers have bested Calgary’s second-best, Joel Broda. Then again, Calgary’s also gotten a more balanced scoring attack, with twelve total players in the Top 40 compared to Tri-City’s eight. While Tri-City’s top end has performed slightly better than Calgary’s, depth always tends to win me over in the playoffs. Advantage Calgary.
• Season series. In their lone meeting this season, the Hitmen defeated the Americans 3-0 at home on January 31, with Martin Jones recording a 35-save shutout. Advantage Calgary; I really have nothing else to day, since nothing other than Pechurskiy stands out to me about that evening. (Though I see now it came right after the Wheaties beat us 6-3 on the strength of five goals in 11 minutes; now that evening, I do unfortunately remember.)
• Playoff history: N/A.

I’m not going to actually come right out and make a prediction. I don’t want to do that, because that requires thinking, and I hate doing that when I don’t have to regarding junior hockey. It should be pointed out, though, that despite the much greater disparity in regular seasons standings points last year compared to this year (24 vs. 10), the Kelowna Rockets played a style that stymied the Hitmen utterly in their late-season matchup, and had brought in a late-season ringer in Mikael Backlund; the Americans, in a one-game sample, didn’t, nor did they bring in anyone of that calibre at any point during the season. Calgary, meanwhile, imported an entire line plus from Kamloops that’s proven an important part of their late-season surge and playoff effort. Plus, while last year’s Hitmen had basically strolled through the playoffs on the strength of pure talent alone, this year’s team has had to work for their spot in the final battle, especially against the high-flying Wheat Kings last round. I think the best thing I can say is that I’m less scared of this final than I was last year’s, but by no means am I going to unequivocally state that they’re going to win, and that the Wheaties will get their shot at vengeance. Too much can happen over the course of a seven-game series for me to commit that strongly about something I’m so emotionally invested in. I’m just going to sit hunched forward on the edge of my seat, watching and yelling frantically and waving my flag like a maniac, and hope for the best; it’s all I can really do.

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.

The Oilers had a lot of things go wrong this year and as much as people like to bring up the cap I’m not convinced that it limited them this year and given that they’re planning to rebuild I’m not sure it limits them next year. However, at the beginning of the season a list was published of the best goalies of the last 3 seasons who were free agents, and what they were signed at. Let’s take a look again.

(Courtesy Copper ‘N Blue)

Notable exclusions from this list on the free agent market were Craig Anderson and… that’s about it.

So let’s cut out the goalies who didn’t play in the NHL this year and look at how many games the remainder played, won, and what was their SV%:

Now, it’s apparent that Deslauriers is off the mark, but not drastically.  Conklin’s number is likely inflated because he just barely crossed the 25GP mark, and as far as everyone else goes, 0.909-0.903 isn’t a huge difference.  It’s also interesting that Biron didn’t even make the list.  Only two other goalies on the list played the same amount as Deslauriers, and those are Roloson and Nittymaki, and they’re anywhere from 4 years to “old as the hills” older than him.

Now let’s take a look at those teams’ combined stats:

• St. Louis: 82GP, 40W, 0.912SV% – 2473SA – $4.3mil
• Tampa Bay: 82GP, 34W, 0.902SV% – 2575SA – $2.8mil
• New York Islanders: 82GP, 34W, 0.901SV% – 2619SA – $8.4mil
• Carolina: 82GP, 35W, 0.903SV% – 2574SA – $3.666mil
• Columbus: 82GP, 32W, 0.900SV% – 2514SA – $2.105mil

So judging by the win and SV% columns, St. Louis cleaned up, though they also had the least SA.

NOTE: There may be some issues with these numbers because of how NHL counts goals.  I’m unsure whether OT goals and SO goals are counted in this measure.

It also bears mentioning that the only teams who got a free-agent goaltender and are actually in the playoffs are Colorado and Philadelphia, and they both backed in. (Ignoring Raycroft, LaBarbera and Danis who each played less than 25 games)

What does all this mean?  If there was a goalie not named Anderson worth spending money on this past offseason, it was Conklin but god knows he’ll never play in Edmonton again.  And while Edmonton obviously did the worst, it did the worst with the only team in the league to play rookies for more than 60 games this season.  Add that to 525 man-games lost and 135 defenceman-games-lost (and 56 Hesky-games lost) and it’s tough to argue about the horribleness of the goaltending relative to what was available.  I think it’s a pretty safe assumption that with half of the injuries Edmonton certainly wouldn’t have gotten first overall pick.

In short, the complaints that people had about the Khabibulin signing and free-agency were blown out of proportion.  Yes, Anderson was a great buy.  Yes, Conklin is actually pretty good.  Yes, Khabibulin cost a decent amount of money.  But when it comes down to it having more cap space wouldn’t have fixed Edmonton’s problems this season, and there’s quite a bit of space free next season.  St. Louis got the best bargain, and they’re also the one of these teams who finished in 17th place overall.  The Islanders got the worst bargain, followed by Edmonton.

No, this isn’t an argument in favour of Khabibulin.  This isn’t even an argument in favour of good cap management.  It’s an argument purely saying that at the end of the day the stats are more or less the same so we just paid a bit more to get that #1 pick, not to mention driving down the prices on their RFA signings this offseason (Gagner, Cogliano, Potulny, Dubnyk, Deslauriers, Pouliot, Brule).  I mean, have you seen Calgary’s cap hit for next season?

Plus, 2 spots on the top 10 saves of the year isn’t bad for a rookie, no matter how dismally the rest of the year went. (Yes, I know they were in the same game. Sidenote: Detroit was on the wrong end of 4 of them? Crazy.)