Jump to content

Black Jack!


Guest yave1964
 Share

Recommended Posts

21!!! Wish I was a t a casino right now, I know what I would be playing. Great team defense, up 2-0 going into the third I thought the Wings laid back a bit more than I would have liked, the Stars carried the play but with team defense they only allowed Dallas one two shots in the first twelve minutes before we started pushing back. Wow I hope we can convince Stuart to stay....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@OzFlyer An asterisk? Is that to include the shoot-out wins?

The one thing I realized is that the last few weeks when folks were talking about this record, the players downplayed it by saying they really didn't think about it much. But when they hit the ice last night, looking at the way they played, every guy on that team and the coaches wanted that record more than anything that night. This was not just another win, and those guys are thrilled beyond believe to be a part of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@OzFlyer An asterisk? Is that to include the shoot-out wins?

The one thing I realized is that the last few weeks when folks were talking about this record, the players downplayed it by saying they really didn't think about it much. But when they hit the ice last night, looking at the way they played, every guy on that team and the coaches wanted that record more than anything that night. This was not just another win, and those guys are thrilled beyond believe to be a part of this.

And didn't ya love Mike Milbury's comment? He said that it's not REALLY the record, because the '29-'30 Bruins actually played and won 2 more games during that streak that were in their building, but they were not the home team. I guess there were problems with one of the other arenas, so they switched venues, but the Bruins were still "visitors." He said that the RW would have to win 2 more games to TRULY own the record.

Gosh! I wish WE could have our road games at the Joe too!

Eat my shorts, Mike!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@OzFlyer An asterisk? Is that to include the shoot-out wins?

The one thing I realized is that the last few weeks when folks were talking about this record, the players downplayed it by saying they really didn't think about it much. But when they hit the ice last night, looking at the way they played, every guy on that team and the coaches wanted that record more than anything that night. This was not just another win, and those guys are thrilled beyond believe to be a part of this.

But I like the attitude. Yes, WHEN THAT OPPORTUNITY IS ACTUALLY HERE, you go for it! But not before it. And they haven't lost sight of the fact that the Cup's the goal. Not the record. They've got a VERY good Rangers team with a very good goalie one point behind 'em in the President's Cup standings. With the way they play at home, home ice throughout the playoffs will be very important for the Wings this year more than others. They want that! They need the points to get there, and that's their focus. That's not to mention the Preds who are also staying tough, and are 12-2-2 against Central Division opponents--better record than ours right now.

No lettin' up! Babs stresses this, and Lidstrom is in too. Top-down leadership. They're all in.

Joey Mac's gotta be loving being able to contribute significantly. I think he can say #2 now.

Edited by SpikeDDS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I like the attitude. Yes, WHEN THAT OPPORTUNITY IS ACTUALLY HERE, you go for it! But not before it.

True enough. The Cup is still the goal. But it's silly to say that they haven't paid much attention to the win streak record and are not really concerned with it. The two points ARE what counts, but this is two points you'll remember for the rest of your life. These two points are all the more special now because of what they carry. You'd be foolish not to want these two points a little bit more than you'd want the two points in whatever game three weeks ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad we could help Podein. I made up what I lost in that game against the Habs :-)

I actually would have made money on that game, especially once I found out Nick was out with the flu. I would NOT have guessed that the wheels would have fallen off so hard, though. Still would have made $. Expected a letdown in that game right before the AS break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True enough. The Cup is still the goal. But it's silly to say that they haven't paid much attention to the win streak record and are not really concerned with it. The two points ARE what counts, but this is two points you'll remember for the rest of your life. These two points are all the more special now because of what they carry. You'd be foolish not to want these two points a little bit more than you'd want the two points in whatever game three weeks ago.

There's no question that they DID, but you also didn't see any champagne bottles in the locker room either. They definitely knew and it motivated them to leave everything on the ice like you would hope it would any team in that position. But it is kept in check. They CAN'T get too full of themselves and they know it. If they did that, it would be the beginning of the end, and that end isn't where they raise the Cup.

You have GOT to LOVE that about Lidstrom--his humble and businesslike attitude. And you can see the other players following that lead. But I think Babs has to get some credit for that mindset as well. Pretty much the whole team "gets it," and that is truly amazing to see. As talented as nick is, no one works harder than he does. The entire team will testify to that. Maaaybe Datsyuk, but then again, the same principle applies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a no-win argument. Yes there was no OT nor was there SO, but there also wasn't a salary cap attempting to create more parity. Nor was there as much skill, size, or speed in yesterday's game.

This could go around and around forever, and both sides will never give. Not worth the electrons.

On a semi-related note, anyone want to know why Democrats/Republicans are wrong about everything?<--another useless argument that I refuse to have. Just like the dreaded asterisk, the result of any conversation like this will be fruitless. Why even go there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@hf101: Yes a shootout loss ends the streak and the asterisk goes away.

An overtime tie changes it to an unbeaten streak.

The latter, if I'm not mistaken, contributed to the Flyers 35 game unbeaten streak in the '79 -'80 season.

Re: shootout.

I never liked the idea. What's wrong with a tie?

On the other hand, I remember watching quite a few games before SO and Overtime when teams seemed content to split the point and did nothing offensively the last 5 minutes or so of the 3rd period.

I'd rather see tinkering with OT than rely on the shootout to decide a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SpikeDDS

I don't think discussing why shootouts have a purpose in today's NHL is a useless argument.

If the Redwings suffered a shootout loss the win streak would have ended. There would be no "*".

I'm confused. Please help me understand: Why is it you think there IS an asterisk, which is why OzFlyer posted the original asterisk? It seems to me that the asterisk suggests that the SO wins would have been OT ties, which in the Flyers' era would have ended the home winning streak, right? Hence the asterisk. No argument.

But that's not the game either now. Today's game, that's how it is. I won't try to tell you that it's not awesome having Pavel Datsyuk as the first SO shooter in every shootout. Who WOULDN'T want that?!

On the flip side, in today's game, it's a salary cap era. There is more parity in the league now than ever before, making the games more competitive. It has NEVER been more true that on any given day any team can beat any other team than it is today, which makes keeping a streak going harder.

Bottom line, it's an apples-to-oranges comparison. Each side has it's merits; each side has it's shortcomings. Trying to convince a Red Wings fan that an asterisk is appropriate will be fruitless. So is trying to convince OzFlyer and others who think it should be there that it is not. As I said, fruitless.

That's what I'm saying. What I'm saying has nothing to do with whether the SO should even be there or not. I have no problem having that discussion. It's a worthy one to have, but it's not really pertinent to this particular thread or discussion. It has no bearing on the asterisk issue.

You wanna talk about the merits of the SO in hockey? I'm happily in for my $.02. Just start a new thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SpikeDDS @MDFlyerFan @hf101

Personally, I like the shoot-out. I know, I know, hold down the yelling and let me explain.

Yes I realize it's not a "team's" way of deciding the game, but you do have to admit, it's fun and exciting to see one-on-one breakaways and trickery. For those of you who do not like the shootout, can you honestly tell me you never watched one and been amazed by some of the moves these guys put on? It's entertaining. And most of the crowd loves it.

You all agree that this game is not getting the public attention that it deserves, yes? The shoot-out has been a great way to get people watching hockey. It's a hook. Once the fans are interested (by shootout, or anything else), then us purists can get our claws into them and really drill home the finer points of the game. But first, we need to get them to buy tickets and merchandise ("Where the REAL money from the mvie is made!").

I say keep the shootout, but make the preceding overtime period 10 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wingnut: a ten minute overtime is interesting. Should reduce the number of shootouts. Maybe stop at the five minute mark and skate 3 on 3 for the final five minutes? That would show some interesting line combinations...but suck for teams playing 70 minutes at the end of back to back games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SpikeDDS

fyi, I'm probably the only Flyers fan on this board that likes watching the shootout after a tie in OT. And I don't mind saying that I'm in favor of them during the regular season. (however I can't say that I enjoy watching the Flyers take them for granted and hardly bother to try winning them) but I think the shootout serves a win / win purpose during the regular season. Most of the league takes trying to get that extra point after OT seriously and for the most part, one can't easily predict an outcome. Thus it is probably more remarkable that Detroit is able to keep a win streak alive when the shootout is part of the win. Because if they lost one of those three shootouts that win streak quickly comes to a halt.

@WingNut722

the biggest problem with a 10min OT is the condition of the ice and it's effect on increasing the potential for injuries due to poor ice. Adding an ice-make defeats the purpose of ending the game quickly within the allotted time slot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep the shootout, but only award two points period. Think about it, the NBA, NFL and MLB all have extra time, either overtime or extra innings. A win is a win and a loss is a loss. I dont think a team should be rewarded for a loss, we are the only real sport that does this......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@yave1964 @hf101

Good points from both. That's the biggest reason why the standings are so tight is that there really is no parity, given the extra point awarded to team which forces overtime. Perhaps if they eliminated the extra point, we would have what we have in the Southeast, where you ahve to win the Division, just to make the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@yave1964 @hf101

Good points from both. That's the biggest reason why the standings are so tight is that there really is no parity, given the extra point awarded to team which forces overtime. Perhaps if they eliminated the extra point, we would have what we have in the Southeast, where you ahve to win the Division, just to make the playoffs.

On principle, I'm actually of the opinion that the point-for-a-loss should ONLY be given if you lose in a SO. If you lose in OT, you lost ACTUALLY PLAYING HOCKEY just like most other games! If you make it all the way to the SO and lose, I think you should get a point, because you're not gonna lose playing hockey. Winning via SO should NOT be a 2-point difference. It decides the game, but the game is hockey, not shootouts. There's a reason the SCP's have no shootouts...and is there anything in sports more fun to watch than overtime in the SCPs? (Swimsuit portfolios aside ;-) )

The only potential problem with this is that it might make more teams play not to lose in OT, not wanting to come away empty-handed. It would probably make the OT play more boring, and that wouldn't be so good. I hate play-not-to-lose hockey even more than I hate ties.

I like the SO, but I've got a team with a very good goalie and the BEST shootout man in the game starting off every SO in Pavel Datsyuk, so OF COURSE I like shootouts! ;-) Obviously selfish, and not really in the best interests of the game.

Thinking beyond selfishness, I still like the shootout better than ties. Ties are very unsatisfying. And SO's DO provide a showcase for the game. How many times have I watched clips of Datsyuk's dangles on YouTube? And I just recently watched that old 15-round Rangers-Caps SO. That was crazy! And the final goal being a through the legs move!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with all the arguments on the "streak". They are all good points. Being a Flyers fan, I believe the asterisk applies in this situation because without the shootout the streak would have ended at 12 games (Jan 12th, first SO win). And I don't mean that's a bad thing...It is an impressive streak.

Pretty good article here:

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=617405&print=true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with all the arguments on the "streak". They are all good points. Being a Flyers fan, I believe the asterisk applies in this situation because without the shootout the streak would have ended at 12 games (Jan 12th, first SO win). And I don't mean that's a bad thing...It is an impressive streak.

Pretty good article here:

http://www.nhl.com/i...7405&print=true

Thanks for the article. Nice analysis.

I will not argue that the Flyers record was probably harder to achieve. The no-tie thing IS a big advantage and does make the feat easier to do.

That said, I do not think there should be an asterisk as compared with baseball's home run record. In hockey, the GAME changed. The rules did, and everyone is subject to the same rules. In baseball, individuals broke the rules and got away with it. THAT is asterisk-worthy if not worthy of removal from the record books altogether. These rules changes are agreed upon by the league. The record is the record.

As I mentioned, the salary cap sure makes it harder to keep a record like this going. It that as significant as the no-ties? Probably not. But it's still pretty significant. Doing it in an era when you could buy any team you could possibly afford is different than it is today.

Nevertheless, for the record to mean as much as the Flyers, they'd have to win a few more home games and extend the streak. The longer it goes, the more worthy it becomes, and the more legitimate the record is/will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...