Official 2009 Stanley Cup Playoff Thread

Wings in 6 due to a bunch of blown calls favoring the pens and if we don't get back some of our start players. Lets go wings!
 
Audino said:
Not a fan of either team, but I'm rooting for Pittsburgh mostly so I can get to see Marian get Hossowned now that he's in the finals. And Red Wings in 5? I wouldn't bet on that.
Click to expand...

I'd bet on it, but I don't want to take your money like that Dino. And didn't you root for Pitts last year, too? Look at the good that did.

Tim Wakefield said:
Gonna be one hell of a series though.
Click to expand...

That, I will agree with. They're two great teams, I like watching Crosby and Malkin work but I'm definitely going to lean in our favor as far as the series goes.
 
Morwen said:
I'd bet on it, but I don't want to take your money like that Dino. And didn't you root for Pitts last year, too? Look at the good that did.
Click to expand...

We just did bet on it. And I wouldn't expect my sole rooting being the cause of a team losing. Had a bunch of guys on that team that were kind of like "What are playoffs?" This year they know.

Pens in 6. Hopefully the Wings quit crying about the shortened schedule before the start of game 1.
 
reason 1 of 4 why the wings are better than the pens. pure pwnage. again
 
Audino said:
We just did bet on it. And I wouldn't expect my sole rooting being the cause of a team losing. Had a bunch of guys on that team that were kind of like "What are playoffs?" This year they know.

Pens in 6. Hopefully the Wings quit crying about the shortened schedule before the start of game 1.
Click to expand...

So... do you think we stopped crying tonight? Or are you unsure?


OH. SNAP.
 
reason number 2 of 4 why the wings are better than the pens. pens got served.
lets not even talk about malkin. looks like someone is frustrated because now, they actually have to play a team they arent worthy of playing. and they cant do shit against em
 
Last edited:
masterorion said:
lets not even talk about malkin
Click to expand...

No, lets. Like I said, I'm rooting for the Penguins, but I'm not a big Penguins fan. They're a division rival to my team. However, what Malkin did to Hank made the whole series worth it for me no matter who wins. I don't think it was as much frustration as it was Malkin growing up and realizing that its not just Crosby that leads that team.

Morwen said:
So... do you think we stopped crying tonight? Or are you unsure?
Click to expand...

Winning two games doesn't change the fact that they were whining about the NHL shortening the schedule. I don't really feel "told."
 
Last edited:
Audino said:
No, lets. Like I said, I'm rooting for the Penguins, but I'm not a big Penguins fan. They're a division rival to my team. However, what Malkin did to Hank made the whole series worth it for me no matter who wins. I don't think it was as much frustration as it was Malkin growing up and realizing that its not just Crosby that leads that team.



Winning two games doesn't change the fact that they were whining about the NHL shortening the schedule. I don't really feel "told."
Click to expand...

you do know, that in normal games, fighting in the last 5 mins will get you a penalty. right? possibly getting your team a penalty in the playoffs like that is not leading a team. its a nail in the coffin. not that detroit needs it or anything. fighting during a game is frustration/annoyance getting out of the mind. if you dont think so, you have never played hockey before. a true leader takes the loss with a grain of salt and uses that loss to get stronger and pump up his team in the process to not take another loss....or try harder.

regardless, crosby, malkin, whoever. not gonna win them the game. its a team game. not an individual game. EX: stevie yzerman. one of the greatest captains, redwing, leaders, and players of all time. didnt ever show his frustration like malkin did. but he has always had a team that had great chemistry together.
this is no different than what lidstrom has with him as a captain. this is the reason why detroit is a team of the decades. the talent on detroits side is equal to that of pittsburgh. but the ones that are scoring all the points arent the crosby's or zetterberg's. the player that has played the absolute best for detroit through the playoffs is a rookie picked up from minors. helm. also, Abdelkader ....2 goals in 2 games. helm has shown the heart and hustle that no one else on either team has shown. you would have thought helm played for detroit for the last 5 years. he never gives up on the puck.
dont get me wrong, malkin has really improved from last season. but, hes not THE team. he really scares me as far as being a prescence more than crosby does.
next game or two, im routing for pittsburgh to win just so detroit can win it at the joe this time
 
Do you just repeat everything that the guys say on the radio or actually think about things? Cause it seems like the former. There's circumstances for that instigator rule that the NHL has and nothing Malkin did exactly matched up to the criteria. Yzerman was a good captain, but a poor example here. Other great captains: Bobby Clarke, Scott Stevens, Keith Primeau, Mark Messier, Clark Gillies, Terry O'Reilly... all guys that wouldn't hesitate to show you whats up if you fuck with one of their guys. In Steve's case, and a lot of other European captains like Lidstrom, you get other people to do that for you.
 
Last edited:
Audino said:
Do you just repeat everything that the guys say on the radio or actually think about things? Cause it seems like the former. There's circumstances for that instigator rule that the NHL has and nothing Malkin did exactly matched up to the criteria. Yzerman was a good captain, but a poor example here. Other great captains: Bobby Clarke, Scott Stevens, Keith Primeau, Mark Messier, Clark Gillies, Terry O'Reilly... all guys that wouldn't hesitate to show you whats up if you fuck with one of their guys. In Steve's case, and a lot of other European captains like Lidstrom, you get other people to do that for you.
Click to expand...
your almost right. nothing malkin did had nothing to do with the instigating a fight. except, well....except to instigate a fight. are you blind? you dont have to listen to what any announcer says to know that he started throwing punches. you also dont have to listen to announcers to know its a penatly either. the pussy needs to take the loss like a man. fighting for the cause will only make it worse for u. i know that when i played in leagues, you would be watching and waiting for paybacks if paybacks were needed.
you also seemed to only name off the tough guys of the league and conveniently left out the 2 most famous/best players to ever have the captains C on the jersey. both of which never instigated fights. gretzky and lemieux.

either way, plain and simple, detroit has no need to want to fight. they arent the ones losing the series by a large margin. and yes, in teh playoffs, 2 games is a huge deficit to come back from when your playing a team like detroit.
 
Last edited:
masterorion said:
your almost right. nothing malkin did had nothing to do with the instigating a fight. except, well....except to instigate a fight. are you blind? you dont have to listen to what any announcer says to know that he started throwing punches.
Click to expand...

Rule 47.22 said:
A player who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five minutes or at any time in overtime shall be suspended for one game, pending a review of the incident. The director of hockey operations will review every such incident and may rescind the suspension based on a number of criteria. The criteria for the review shall include, but not be limited to, the score, previous incidents, etc...
Click to expand...

Colin Campbell said:
None of the criteria in this rule applied in this situation. Suspensions are applied under this rule when a team attempts to send a message in the last five minutes by having a player instigate a fight. A suspension could also be applied when a player seeks retribution for a prior incident. Neither was the case here and therefore the one game suspension is rescinded.
Click to expand...

Who threw the first punch isn't even the point of it all. I said it had a bit to do with frustration, but more importantly, he's sticking up for his teammates and setting an example that people wouldn't expect him to set.

masterorion said:
you also dont have to listen to announcers to know its a penatly either. the pussy needs to take the loss like a man. fighting for the cause will only make it worse for u. i know that when i played in leagues, you would be watching and waiting for paybacks if paybacks were needed.
Click to expand...

You've never seen a game where a fight boosts morale? There's lots of reasons to throw down. This clearly wasn't a case of "I'm gonna punch this guy because we're losing." Its the Penguins, not the Flyers from the 70's.

masterorion said:
you also seemed to only name off the tough guys of the league and conveniently left out the 2 most famous/best players to ever have the captains C on the jersey. both of which never instigated fights. gretzky and lemieux.
Click to expand...

Of course I named them. They were all people expected to lead by example and they never let a teammate get thrown around. That was the point of me naming them. Gretzky didn't have to instigate anything because he had fucking Messier and Tikkanen ready to shove your balls up your ass and down your throat if you touched Gretzky. Why on earth do you think the guy always had room to rack up to 215 points in a season? Are you sure you watch hockey outside Detroit?

As for Mario never instigating a fight, and I mean instigating in the penalty way... wait til the end of the video. Thank you in advance.



masterorion said:
either way, plain and simple, detroit has no need to want to fight. they arent the ones losing the series by a large margin. and yes, in teh playoffs, 2 games is a huge deficit to come back from when your playing a team like detroit.
Click to expand...

Yup, they don't. And yup, it is. The Pens are the ones that needed a fire lit under their asses. Not the Wings. This is a very common thing in hockey. But you know, I'm sure, since you played and assume that I never have.
 
What kind of sports lets you play with a stick, your hands, and your feet? That damn puck gets touched from so many angles and body parts they should charge you to watch something like that.

On topic, go PENS! Showing my love for Timwakefield
 
Audino said:
Who threw the first punch isn't even the point of it all. I said it had a bit to do with frustration, but more importantly, . he's sticking up for his teammates and setting an example that people wouldn't expect him to set



You've never seen a game where a fight boosts morale? There's lots of reasons to throw down. This clearly wasn't a case of "I'm gonna punch this guy because we're losing." Its the Penguins, not the Flyers from the 70's.



Of course I named them. They were all people expected to lead by example and they never let a teammate get thrown around. That was the point of me naming them. Gretzky didn't have to instigate anything because he had fucking Messier and Tikkanen ready to shove your balls up your ass and down your throat if you touched Gretzky. Why on earth do you think the guy always had room to rack up to 215 points in a season? Are you sure you watch hockey outside Detroit?

As for Mario never instigating a fight, and I mean instigating in the penalty way... wait til the end of the video. Thank you in advance.





Yup, they don't. And yup, it is. The Pens are the ones that needed a fire lit under their asses. Not the Wings. This is a very common thing in hockey. But you know, I'm sure, since you played and assume that I never have.
Click to expand...

its great that you can quote the rule book, but you left out a major part of it that clarifies who the instigator is. i didnt assume you didnt follow/play hockey up till this point where you left this out. this is a huge part of how malkin is the instigator.
so, for your reading pleasure,
http://www.nhl.com/rules/rule56.html#a



"An instigator of an altercation shall be a player who by his actions or demeanor demonstrates any/some of the following criteria: distance traveled; gloves off first; first punch thrown; menacing attitude or posture; verbal instigation or threats; conduct in retaliation to a prior game (or season) incident; obvious retribution for a previous incident in the game or season."

bolded above applies to malkin on zetterberg. once fighting has commenced, both players are subject to penalty. anyone that has followed hockey for the last decade and a half would know about that penalty. there is a reason why players dance around in circles now a days instead of dropping gloves right away and just going at it like they used to. neither player want to get that instigator penalty but they both want to get their frustrations out.
in this case, it was a shoving match between a bunch of people until malkin turned it into a fight.
"Who threw the first punch isn't even the point of it all. I said it had a bit to do with frustration, but more importantly, . he's sticking up for his teammates and setting an example that people wouldn't expect him to set"

your absolutely right. it is a player sticking up for his teamate. in this case, your wrong though. malkin wasnt sticking up for his player. zetterberg pushed whoever off of osgood after the stick poke to the chest. perhaps you should watch the vid again. from that push off from zetterberg, malkin starts swinging wildly with his stick and fists at zetterberg.
watch the vid from 1:14 in. this is a classic display of protecting the goalie. as all teams do, all the time. always turns into a shoving match up till the point that a team is frustrated enough that they start fighting.
http://www.nowpublic.com/sports/malkin-zetterberg-fight-does-malkin-deserve-suspension

as for gretzky and lemieux...neither of them told their team to do the fighting for them. the fact that they had people stick up for them doesnt mean anything for their leadership. gotta protect, usually the goalie and/or star player. but, that doesnt mean the captain tells them to do that. MOST of the nhl greats, who are captains, are usually playmakers. being the leading PIM player doesnt help anyone on the ice. but again, i would hate to say that no one player ever gets frustrated and wants to go at it, but the best of the best typically keep their cool and try to win the game being on the ice, not in the box.

also, i never said its a case of "im gonna fight cuz were losing"...come on. get serious. at the point where you are losing and frustrated, if you play hockey, you know that any little thing will set most players off. IE: zetterberg pushing your teamate for abuse to his goaltender. that would have set me off too at that point. heck, im really surprised that no one on detroits side whooped that guys ass.

but in final, the pens finally showed up up to play...well, in the first period. they dropped off significantly after the first and played as they have for most of the playoffs. its good to see them win so that detroit can win it in detroit this time.

my prediction, detroit in 5

p.s. in your video, the opponent, could ALMOST be called for instigating. but almost. everything that was going on there is to get under lemieux's skin. it was quite clever too. nothing done was against nhl rules up to the point lemieux attacked him with fighting. once he crossed the blue line, you can tell his demeanor was no longer to play the puck. that by all means was instigation. but that is because he let him get under his skin. i would bet that lemieux had a horrible game because he let someone get that far into his head, that he stopped playing mentally.
that video doesnt do a whole lot of justice to your side in the fact that its the 2nd fight that lemieux was in since 1987. big deal. gretzky has had at least 1 fight that i know of. but put that into comparison of the amount of games they have played. the amount of fights they have been part of becomes miniscule in comparison.

bottom line, put into comparison of what lemeiux did in teh vid and how malkin acted, they are both instigating penalties. if both parties throw punches, they are both penalized for fighting but whoever starts it gets that much more punishment. now, they probably wont do anything in future games as far as suspension because it would give that much more of an advantage over the other. they never really have in the playoffs. since, fights like this are at the end of the game. hmm. i wonder why
 
Last edited:
i was looking over previous posts, i should have clarified when i originally mentioned malkin, fighting, and penalty.
if you look back, you would notice that i never said that malkin should be suspended. but, i do remember saying it would get them an un needed penalty. most times, an extra couple mins in the box for instigating. playoffs, they usually never suspend. i say usually because look at the kronwall incident. totally bad call to begin with, but whatever. thats another issue.
the rule 47.22 simply notates suspension with the ability for the NHL to give or take back the suspension depending on circumstance. however, instigator penalty can still be given a major. in this case, do i think he should have gotten a major...wouldnt have really mattered since there was less than a min left. but if that were to happen at the start or middle of the game.. i believe he would have probably gotten a 5 min. and zetterberg would have gone in with a 2. or, malkin would have gotten 2+2. not sure how they do it anymore as far as instigator goes. according to the rule book, they get slapped hard for shit like this. but rarely will they do it in the playoffs to avoid ridicule.
 
Last edited:
Whatever way you want to look at it, you can now argue whether or not that whole event had anything to do about the Penguins having a little extra spring in their step tonight. As for the things you bolded, only one of the three was blatant. I wouldn't consider him having to travel for or exactly being menacing. Come on now.

And that video wasn't the only instance of Lemieux going after someone like that. There was a fight he started with Krieger once. Just saying since you said he's never done something like instigating. The point wasn't about the amount of games, it was about how you said that they "never instigated fights."

You'll see it how you want though.
 
malkin traveled from the near side of the net all the way around to get to zetterberg. he also swung first and was the first on to have his gloves off. but only one of those instances is needed to qualify him as instigator. therefore, as i said. malkin is the instigator of the fight.
also, your trying to say that malkin didnt instigate anything. when in fact he did, because he was given the penalty. they just happen to wave a suspension.

also, when i said "they never instigate fights", i suppose i should spoon feed everything to you and make everythiing i say doesnt have any stretch to it. heck, id never fight anyone on the ice during a game. thats just stupid....(sense any sarcasm?). of course i would. but i wouldnt be out there headhunting. for any player to say they wouldnt is lying. so, ill make sure i dont exaggerate my point for u so you dont take it so literal.
ill fix it to "he rarely instigated fights". hows that
 
Last edited:
masterorion said:
malkin traveled from the near side of the net all the way around to get to zetterberg. he also swung first and was the first on to have his gloves off. but only one of those instances is needed to qualify him as instigator. therefore, as i said. malkin is the instigator of the fight.
also, your trying to say that malkin didnt instigate anything. when in fact he did, because he was given the penalty. they just happen to wave a suspension.
Click to expand...

I didn't say the penalty was BS, I'm just supporting the lack of a suspension which is the usual case involved with those penalties now. Especially in the end of a game. And I said that one of the reasons was blatant, which justifies the penalty. Something I didn't say (and I checked) is that Malkin didn't deserve the penalty or instigate at all. And if 5 feet is traveling, well, sure. He went out of his way to get to Hank, but not out of his way in the sense that he was a good 15 feet away or any other distance that shows obvious headhunting.

masterorion said:
also, when i said "they never instigate fights", i suppose i should spoon feed everything to you and make everythiing i say doesnt have any stretch to it. heck, id never fight anyone on the ice during a game. thats just stupid....(sense any sarcasm?). of course i would. but i wouldnt be out there headhunting. for any player to say they wouldnt is lying. so, ill make sure i dont exaggerate my point for u so you dont take it so literal.
ill fix it to "he rarely instigated fights". hows that
Click to expand...

Everyone knows sarcasm doesn't carry well in text form. When people say the word "never" then chances are its going to be read considering the definitive term of never. But if we're being snide now, then sorry, next time I'll read your mind instead of your actual writing that grammatically resembles a 13 year old girl texting TRL to play her favorite video. You said Lemieux and Gretzky never instigated. Gretzky I'll agree with. The guy hardly even dug for a puck. Lemieux wasn't always Mr Lady Byng. I provided two examples. That's all.

Next thing you know I'll be supporting the Penguins getting away with too many men on the ice for 25 seconds or so. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top