Also note that I’ll probably be relying on fancystats way more this year, just because I’ve had less than zero time to watch teams play, for the most part. I’m grumpy about it, but I’m hoping I can make up for it in the later rounds. [Ed: And I think after citing the fancystats I've ignored them in at least half of the predictions. Oh well.]

Clarence Campbell Conference Quarterfinals

(1) Vancouver vs. (8) Los Angeles

Playoff History: The only recent playoff series went to the Canucks, but back in the days of the Smythe Division, Gretzky’s Kings had the upper hand.

1982 DF	1991 DSF	1993 DF	2010 CQF
4-1	4-2	4-2	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: The Canucks went to Game 7 of the Finals before losing to the Bruins. LA, meanwhile, was ousted in the first round on an OT goal by the clutchest man in hockey…Joe Thornton? Really? Wait, lemme see that.

Season Series: Even at two, with one of LA’s wins coming in the coin-flip.

Doogie Says: This should be a much closer series than you’d really expect for a 1-8; a lot of the even strength fancystats are either a wash or favour LA, strangely enough (their Fenwick Close is 2% better than Vancouver, and since the deadline, it’s #1 with a bullet), while Vancouver owns far and away the better power play. Goaltending will be a factor as always, with all three of Quick, Schneider, and Luongo finishing with similar EV SV% numbers: any one of those three could steal a game and turn the series. (Quick and Luongo also both have histories of…inconsistent play in the postseason.) That being said, I think the deciding factor is going to be the fact that I still don’t trust the Kings to be able to put the puck in the ocean with any consistency, Carter be damned. Speaking of, looks like Carter will be back for Game 1 tonight, while Daniel Sedin will not; keep an eye on that to be a thing as this series goes long and becomes ever-tighter. Similarly, the depth players in this series could prove difference-makers in at least one or two games, and in that instance, I’d give the nod to Vancouver. Holding my nose, crossing my fingers, going with Canucks in seven. (Aside: Canucks fans can’t even agree on this one.)

Hoop Says: Kings in seven.

Matt Says: Kings in six. Unless something out of the ordinary happens, it’s a question of when Vancouver will choke. Let’s go with right off the bat.

Gerard Says: Kings in six. Why? Because fuck Vancouver. That’s why. [Ed: He's consistent. This is at least the seventh consecutive series he's picked against Vancouver going back to 2010, with a 2-4 record in those series. I'd check earlier, but those archives only exist on Gerard's computer, and I'm not going to harrass him for it at this point.]

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

(2) St. Louis vs. (7) San Jose

Playoff History: More than I thought there’d be, to be honest. They met three times in the first half of last decade, with the Sharks somehow getting the upper hand in two of them. I mean, seriously, what the hell happened in 2000, St. Louis? You were 27 points and 72 goals better than them!

2000 CQF	2001 CQF	2004 CQF
4-3	4-2	4-1

Previously On…Survivor: St. Louis haven’t made the playoffs since 2009, when they got bounced by the Canucks in four straight, and haven’t won a playoff series since 2002. The Sharks made the conference finals for the second consecutive year, this time losing to Vancouver in five.

Season Series: St. Louis spanked San Jose, taking all four games in regulation.

Doogie Says: St. Loo owns San Jose (and indeed, most of the NHL) by most metrics out there, traditional and fancystats. Standings points, goal differential, Fenwick Close/Tied, even strength save percentage, shot prevention (even strength and PK)… all of them are in the upper echelon, many of them in the top one to three. San Jose can, however, still boast at least a few more goals for (18 over 82 games), better shot creation (even strength and PP), and a better top end offence (Joe Thornton had 23 points more than David Backes and T.J. Oshie, the two teams’ respective scoring leaders). Yes, Brian Elliott – who set the modern NHL record for GAA (1.56) and SV% (.940) – is now out with an upper body injury, but Jaro Halak (1.97/.926, .938 EV SV% compared to Elliott’s .945) was no slouch, either. And even if the otherworldly goaltending from both ‘keepers regresses (or Jake Allen somehow winds up in net), the Blues are still a balls-out good team at controlling the play: they play a hard, physical game while minding their responsibilities in the way Hitchcock teams always have. They’re not a lock for the Stanley Cup or anything, but San Jose is aging, relying on their backup after their Stanley Cup champion goalie couldn’t get the job done, and less deep up front than they’ve been in the past. Also, as a reminder: the Blues dismantled the Sharks in the regular season. This, and Devils-Panthers, seem like the two no-brainers here, but then I’ve been wrong on stuff like this before (see: MTL-WAS/PIT, 2010). Blues in four.

Hoop Says: Blues in six.

Matt Says: Blues in four. Can San Jose go anywhere this post-season? What am I thinking? Let’s go with a repeat of the season series.

Gerard Says: Sharks in four. St. Louis swept the season series. Symmetry.

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

(3) Phoenix vs. (6) Chicago

Playoff History: Bupkis. The Jets and Hawks were in separate divisions for most of the ’80s, and were never decent at the same time in the ’90s or ’00s. In fact, they frequently missed the playoffs together during the interlockout period.

Previously On…Survivor: Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: the Coyotes lost to the Red Wings in the first round, and Chicago played Vancouver last year. The difference being, Chicago was an OT giveaway by Chris Campoli away from overcoming an 0-3 deficit, but ultimately bowed out in seven in round one. This is also your annual reminder that the Jets/Coyotes franchise has not won a playoff series since 1987.

Season Series: The Coyotes took three of four, two of them in regulation.

Doogie Says: The problem with trying to use fancystats to call a playoff series is that they’re not, in my view, as cut and dried as is sometimes suggested, and this series is the A-1 example of this. Chicago has better possession numbers, but they’ve had Godawful goaltending (though granted, a bunch of that is on Ray Emery, who’s been AHL-quality), while Phoenix has had mediocre possession but excellent goaltending. So call that a wash. Special teams? Both have awful PK by shot metrics, Phoenix is also terrible on the PP, but Chicago is at least mediocre there. Okay, now we’re getting somewhere. But then you look at the one-goal-game records, and Phoenix’s is wickedly low, suggesting that they may be undervalued a bit in the standings, while Chicago’s is pretty consistent with their 2+-goal-game record. And then I throw up my hands and say fuck it, I’m going with my gut here.

It goes something like this. Phoenix nearly beat Detroit in 2010 despite missing Shane Doan for half the series, and probably would’ve been a lot closer in 2011 if not for Bryz going all flaketastic over the parks in Vinny Peg and what-not. Chicago isn’t as deep as they were two years ago, nor as deep as any Detroit team in recent memory. The Hawks are loaded with injuries, most notably captain Toews, and while he may be back for Game 1, there’s no guarantee that a) it happens, and b) he’s 100%. Plus, the Phoenix organization and its fans really deserve at least one bit of success before they’re forced to pack it in, especially with smart stuff like that Vermette trade on their resume. So, for the second year in a row, I’m gonna stick my neck out here and pick the Coyotes in seven. Don’t let me down again here, guys.

Hoop Says: Blackhawks in six.

Matt Says: Blackhawks in five. Knowing that one team looked good in the middle and the other seemed better than they should be leaves one with a tough choice…

Gerard Says: Blackhawks in seven. Let’s be clear. Nobody will win this. It’s a matter of who loses. Who will fail harder? Chicago’s goaltending or Phoenix’s offense?

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

(4) Nashville vs. (5) Detroit

Playoff History: For some reason, I thought the Preds and Wings had played more than twice, but apparently not. Well, naturally, both series were reasonably recent, and both went in Detroit’s favour.

2004 CQF	2008 CQF
4-2	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: The Preds won their first-ever playoff series against the woefully overmatched Ducks (everyone not named Matt saw that one coming a mile away) before losing to Vancouver in six the next round. Detroit beat Phoenix (again) before losing to San Jose (again) in seven in round two; like Chicago, however, they almost pulled off the 0-3 comeback.

Season Series: Tied at three. Both teams went 2-1 at home, all games were in regulation.

Doogie Says: If this matchup were happening a month ago, it’d be Preds in five and that’s the end of it. Detroit’s started to get healthy again, though, and that should make this a more interesting series. Still, there’s something I just don’t understand: what the ever-loving fuck is with the Wings’ road record? Seriously, their home-road delta is the sort of thing I’d expect from a crap team like Winnipeg or Edmonton, teams with a lot of guys who need matchup help in order to have success. Is it injuries? Age? Depth? Luck? My conversations with Wings fans and perusal of the numbers suggests that it’s a little bit of everything. Whatever the case, it’s something that I imagine most of the hockey world is leaning on in picking Nashville to win this thing. The full-season fancystats laugh at this horrendously, but then the Preds, more than any other team, have heavily remade their roster in the last two months, adding Hal Gill, Andrei Kostitsyn, Paul Gaustad, and prodigal son Alexander Radulov in a go-for-broke effort to bring a Stanley Cup to Music City. And you know, it may just be working: there’s been a definite uptick in their possession, and as Habs blogger Bruce Peter noted, they’ve been particularly good since Radulov arrived in particular. Small samples and all, but it’s promising. More to the point, I’ve been quietly pulling for the Predators for a while, and I’m probably going to be putting all my eggs in their basket for this playoff run. In the absence of any more compelling reason to do so, that may be my ultimate reason for calling it a homer series. Predators in seven.

Hoop Says: Predators in seven.

Matt Says: Predators in six. Safely agreeing with Gerard when he says who knows? Is the third time the charm for Nashville?

Gerard Says: Predators in six. Coinflip. Let’s be honest, nobody has any idea how this will go.

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

Prince of Wales Conference Quarterfinals

(1) NY Rangers vs. (8) Ottawa

Playoff History: In the modern era, none. However, because Ottawa made the critical mistake of claiming continuity with the original franchise back in ’92, I get to pull dumb shit like this:

1930 QF
6-3*

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

Suck on it, Sens fans. This is what your franchise’s early-period salesmanship hath wrought.

Previously On…Survivor: The Rangers bowed out to Washington in five. The Sens were Goddamned terrible last year, and also were the year before, but in 2010, they made the playoffs, anyway, and won the right to get punted by Pittsburgh in five.

Season Series: Surprisingly, Ottawa won it 3-1, all in regulation.

Doogie Says: As Gerard will note in just a couple of paragraphs here, at a certain point, you just gotta stop the puck. While Vezina favourite Henrik Lundqvist has regressed like a boss recently, he’s still one of the elite goaltenders in the NHL, and while Craig Anderson et al. have shown some capacity for getting hot, there’s no good reason to bet on them in a seven-game series. I’m not terribly familiar with the East this year, because Montreal decided they were going to miss the playoffs at Christmas, but I am interested to note that Jason Spezza finished fourth in the NHL in scoring; granted, he’s 25 points back of Evgeni Malkin, but he’s still at the top of that heap of point-per-game-ish players, which is kind of impressive. More impressive, though, is Erik Karlsson putting up 78 points, the highest total for a D since Nicklas Lidstrom put up 80 in the PP-fueled 2005-06 season. However, after those two, things drop off in a hurry, with only three players with more than 40 points on the year, which really doesn’t put them in a much better position than the Rangers, who have the same number of 40-point players, led by 40-goal man Marian Gaborik. Ottawa has the slight advantage by even-strength shot metrics (though I’m told if you toss the Rangers’ first ten games, they’re way better), but it’s worth noting that they’re a way higher-event team in both directions, which is probably not a good thing when dealing with a #1 seed that prides itself on defence and good goaltending; I think they’re going to get burned here trying to run and gun. They’ll make it interesting, but I’ll go with the Rangers in five.

Hoop Says: Rangers in six.

Matt Says: Rangers in six. Very interesting. Will this be a high scoring or low scoring series?

Gerard Says: Rangers in five. At some point, a team needs to stop pucks.

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

(2) Boston vs. (7) Washington

Playoff History: Nothing recent. Just a couple of series on the opposite ends of the ’90s.

1990 CF	1998 CQF
4-0	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: The Bruins are the defending Stanley Cup champions. Washington disposed of the Rangers in round one, before being stunned by the Bolts in four straight.

Season Series: As with the Rangers and Sens, this one actually belongs to the underdog, again by a 3-1 count, with one of Washington’s three victories coming after sixty.

Doogie Says: Years from now, the 2011-12 Capitals will be a case study in when not to fire a coach. They had one of the best even-strength possession ratings in the NHL in late November when Bruce Boudreau was fired (53%), but just Godawful goaltending (a hair above .900). That’s not when you fire your coach: if anything, that’s when you call up the AHL guy to make a point to your two alleged NHL goalies to get their shit together. The goaltending eventually recovered, but the Caps’ even-strength play took a nosedive, and they finished the year dead in the middle of the NHL in both points and Fenwick Close, barely making the playoffs, as Dale Hunter uses such cutting-edge evaluation techniques as “plus-minus” to decide on his scratches. Sure, the Bruins have had their ups and downs, and having Nathan Horton become the new Marc Savard is really going to hurt them in later rounds, but when you consider that Washington has both NHL goalies hurt going into the playoffs, Nick Backstrom recently back from missing half a year with a concussion, and Mike Green wrapping up a lost season spent mostly on the IR, they’re straight-up boned here. Give it to the Bruins in five.

Hoop Says: Bruins in five.

Matt Says: Bruins in five. A team like Boston should be able to grind out enough goals to win.

Gerard Says: Bruins in five. At some point, a team needs to stop pucks.

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

(3) Florida vs. (6) New Jersey

Playoff History: I’d remark on how this isn’t recent and what-not, but considering this is also the last playoff series the Panthers played? Yeeeeah.

2000 CQF
4-0

Previously On…Survivor: As previously noted, the Panthers haven’t made the playoffs since 2000, when the Devils disposed of them in four straight. Their last playoff game victory came on April 17, 1997, a 3-0 decision in Game 1 of their first-round series against the Rangers. Jersey, for their part, missed the playoffs last season, lost in the first round in 2010, and haven’t won a series since 2007.

Season Series: Even at two, with one of the Devils’ wins coming in the coin-flip.

Doogie Says: The Panthers have a few historical marks on their hands this year, none of them worthy of pride: most OT losses in NHL history, worst GD of a division champion in over 30 years (1979 CHI), first negative GD division champion in over 20 years (1989 DET), worst GD of any playoff team in 15 years (1997 MTL), worst fancystats of a playoff team in the fancystats era (2007 TBL). What I’m saying here is, Florida has no business having home ice: they should be closer to the draft lottery. The Devils, meanwhile, held their own in an incredibly tough division, despite Martin Brodeur no longer playing like Martin Brodeur (.908 SV%, second straight below-average year), and despite Travis Zajac missing most of the season due to injury. Part of that’s due to shootout wins, yes (NHL-leading 11), and that’ll bode poorly for them in later rounds, but I just look at the rosters and the stats, and I can’t see any way that Florida comes out on top, unless Scott Clemmensen is the new Dwayne Roloson or something. This is easily the least interesting matchup of round one, and seems the least likely to be a real series. Still, the Panthers did manage to wring two regulation wins out of Jersey, so maybe it won’t be a complete shitshow. Ah, what the hell: Devils in five.

Hoop Says: Devils in five.

Matt Says: Devils in six. No real idea here, but I’m going with New Jersey.

Gerard Says: Devils in four. Florida would have missed the playoffs if not for its lossless streak against the NW. They won 2 games, and the only one in regulation was the Canucks.

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

(4) Pittsburgh vs. (5) Philadelphia

Playoff History: Ah, here’s one we’re all familiar with. An old Patrick Division grudge match with multiple recent editions to stoke the fires.

1989 DF	1997 CQF	2000 CSF	2008 CF	2009 CQF
4-3	4-1	4-2	4-1	4-2

Previously On…Survivor: The Pens were upset in round one by the Lightning, hocking up a 3-1 lead to lose in seven. The Flyers overcame the Sabres in seven before going out meekly in four against the eventual champions from Boston. (It is also worth noting here that the Flyers, the team swept by the Bruins, are back, while Montreal and Tampa, who pushed the Bruins to seven, are out. Wacky.)

Season Series: The Flyers won it 4-2, and finally suffered their first defeat at the Consol Energy Center in the final game of the regular season.

Doogie Says: It should be the most obvious thing in the world. The Penguins are the best team in the NHL, full stop. They were dominant for most of the year with multiple good players, including that Crosby guy, out of action with various maladies. They should run through the East like a chainsaw on a rocket. And yet I’m not convinced that they’ll get past the first round, simply because the Flyers match up against them very well. I always seem to turn these games on in the final five minutes, with the decision already settled, so I can’t tell you what it is, but the fact that it took six tries for the Pens to beat the Flyers in their own damned building for the first time is telling. Is it really the ribs? Has that spell been broken? Which collection of cheap-shot artists and agitating pricks will drive the other off their game first? The season series suggests Philly has the upper hand in that kind of series, and I have no reason to think it’s not going to be that kind of series. Not that both these teams can’t also play a brilliantly skilled game, just that this is too intense of a rivalry not to expect a lot of shenanigans. It’s going to come down to the last game, possibly the very last shot, but give it to the Flyers in seven.

Hoop Says: Penguins in seven.

Matt Says: Flyers in six. So we can’t leave their top two without something to whine about all summer…

Gerard Says: Pittsburgh in six. If either teams gets out of this series without its top three players injured, it’ll be a miracle.

	3	5	4	10	3	1	2
	4	8	8	3	2	5	4

* – Denotes single-game result in Memorial Cup competition.

That last one still hurts my soul every time I think about it. Sigh.

Okay, I’ve been driving myself nuts over this during the few spare minutes I’ve had to think about it over the last few days. So we’ve got Calgary finishing 44-25-3 and +52, versus Brandon finishing 39-28-5 and +16. After a streaky first half, Calgary came on strong with a post-holiday record of 27-10-0 – one of the biggest second-half improvements in the WHL – headlined by a 15-2-0 run during January and February. On the one hand, that’s great cause for optimism, because yay we kicked ass, but then I’ve also learned to be leery of teams that push themselves from the bubble to home ice on the strength of one long run of nigh-unabated success. Take away the one long run, and you’re left with 12-8-0 for the rest of the second half (though granted, there’s also a 1-5-0 run in there; like I said, streaky), and 29-23-3 all told, which prorates to eighth in the East, about where I figured they’d be at the start of the year. Obviously, that’s not how stuff like this really works, but it’s definitely concerning.

I promised myself I’d never try to do advanced stats on the WHL, and that I’d just enjoy the game, but there are some things that have just confused me with this team that I’m trying to understand. Like their first-half tendency to get into lopsided games, both for and against; the world may never understand that one. Or how both goalies have won goalie of the month this year, yet neither has a save percentage above .900 – for comparison’s sake, Brandon’s starter has the third-best SV% in the League at .916 – or how they managed to give up 36 fewer goals than the Wheaties despite all of this. That last one’s a lot easier: I did some quick math off the goalie-stats page and came up with the Hitmen surrendering just 27.1 SA/60, a ridiculously low shot volume, especially for mistake-riddled junior hockey. Again, to compare: regular-season champion Edmonton’s goalies faced 28.4 SA/60; the WHL’s stingiest team, Tri-City, gave up 29.4 SA/60. We don’t have many underlying numbers, but that seems like a really good one to have, especially when you consider that the Central Division was easily the toughest in the WHL this year. (I wish I could search @WHLFacts’ feed easily so I could find the tweet that had GD versus other divisions; I remember that the Central’s was a ridiculous plus, and the BC’s was a ridiculous minus.)

The Hitmen and Wheaties are tied for the 5^th-best GF total (273) in the WHL, with the teams ahead of them being Edmonton and the three good teams in the Norris West. However, the Hitmen have gotten it done a little more at even strength, with a power play efficiency ranked smack in the middle of the League at #12, while Brandon’s sat third overall. However, to balance that out, the Hitmen also have the fourth-best PK efficiency in the League, while Brandon was way down at #15. Rather strikingly, the Wheaties have more scoring from their top line (1.49 PPG average), while the Hitmen have theirs much more spread out (Jimmy Bubnick’s 1.07 PPG leads the team). And finally, we have the season series: 3-1 by games, 19-13 by goals, both to the Hitmen, with only one of those games decided by fewer than three goals. Make of that what you will.

So what does all that mean? Well, first off, I should probably relax a little: this was a team that I didn’t feel like was getting enough breaks early in the year, and they probably got too many late in the year, so maybe their record isn’t as entirely out of whack as it might first seem. They’re sound defensively, which makes life easier for their goalies, and they have a balanced offence that makes it harder to shut them down compared to Brandon. (The Yahoo! preview of this series pointed to the Brandon top line’s age and last-kick-at-the-can desire as a factor in predicting the upset, but one could easily turn that right around when talking about Jimmy Bubnick and captain Cody Sylvester, the only forwards left over from the 2010 championship team. Stone et al. are clearly better, but I’m not convinced it’s going to be the deciding factor.) The Wheaties will get their goals, make no mistake – Calgary’s goalies are highly streaky, and it seems all but certain that one of them is going to give up a fiver at some point – but I feel like on the whole, the Hitmen match up pretty well against them. It’ll be a tighter series than the standings suggest, but I’m confident the Hitmen will win in six games.

• 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.