Bob Lee (QSC) said:Cougars? Who also like hockey?
Yes and they were hot. The kind that dress like they're still 20-some in Flashdance. My gf caught my eyes wandering a few times but she understands. Look-no-touch.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
The Official 2012 NHL Stanely Cup Finals Thread: Part II
- Thread starter warwick.hoy
- Start date
Yes and they were hot. The kind that dress like they're still 20-some in Flashdance. My gf caught my eyes wandering a few times but she understands. Look-no-touch.
Oh you're in Newport? That blows away Santa Monica as far as hot cougars goes. But I think koreatown is still the reigning champ.
Back to hockey--did both teams look tired or what. The team that makes fewer mistakes & better D wins. As w any sport. Go Kings!
Back to hockey--did both teams look tired or what. The team that makes fewer mistakes & better D wins. As w any sport. Go Kings!
I'm not in Newport. My cougar-friend works there.
I didn't get a feeling of the teams being tired. I thought the speed of both teams was pretty good. The Kings passing has been crisper, but a lot of that was due to the Devils doing a better job of applying defensive pressure.
Your right at this point the Kings and Devils (the series isn't over) are the best teams in the NHL. That being said neither plays great hockey. And I'll be surprised if both of them even make the playoffs next year.
And your right I'm spoiled by an organization that despite almost always having late draft choices manages to find a develop many of them into exceptional players. And they have been a legit contender for the cup for probably 15 out of the last 21 years in which they made the playoffs in all of them. And while they were big spenders during those years, they did it because of big fan support and in many seasons they weren't the biggest spenders in the league. I'd rather have that problem than be a fan of a team that finds an acorn every ten years or so.
I'll also admit it will be interesting to see life without Lidstrom. I suspect the Wings and the league had no idea how good he actually was.
+1
My ex's family had season tickets for Ducks games. I got to go to a couple of them, and it was a lot of fun.
I became interested in the sport, but Ive never been one to watch sports on TV unless I was sitting in a bar.
Ive been going to a lot less bars lately, though I was on a date Saturday night and the Italian place had the Kings game on.
Watching it was more interesting than my date.
A friend of mine is one of those - great-looking, 40-something, single, rabid hockey fan (football, too). Actually, she's not far away from you, Bob (her office is in Newport Beach).
Cougars love me, you should introduce us.
I'm curious about what defines "great hockey" for you. Personally, I like the Kings' style of play - especailly since it's highly effective.
To me great teams move the puck very quickly and transition from offense to defense very effectively. They also posses the puck for a large portion of the game. While the Kings have dominated the scoring in the series, I would suggest to you that puck possession is probably about even.
The Kings practice a very deliberate defensive style of hockey. Like I said it almost painful watching their defenseman move the puck. They avoid turnovers (a good thing) at the cost of very slow transitions (a bad thing). I've seen their D make five passes to get the puck out of their own end against one forechecker. Both teams stack up players in the defensive end so shots rarely get thru and both teams rarely have their D join the rush.
One of the reasons I'm not convinced that either goalie is playing that incredible is for most of the games neither has faced a ton of shots. Also both teams to me display an astounding ability to miss the net on several wide open chances.
In other words its not that your seeing great defense as much that you're seeing cautious play and mediocre offense. IMO
Oh, make it happen! Im a total blast!
Im generally well liked, but Ive got my detractors.
I havent been keeping track, who else is on this list?
That's all fine and good, Burkie, but I would suggest that a 15-3 record and going undefeated on the road in the Stanley Cup playoffs is indicative of a great team. Style doesn't amount to greatness if there are no results.
To me great teams move the puck very quickly and transition from offense to defense very effectively. They also posses the puck for a large portion of the game. While the Kings have dominated the scoring in the series, I would suggest to you that puck possession is probably about even.
The Kings practice a very deliberate defensive style of hockey. Like I said it almost painful watching their defenseman move the puck. They avoid turnovers (a good thing) at the cost of very slow transitions (a bad thing). I've seen their D make five passes to get the puck out of their own end against one forechecker. Both teams stack up players in the defensive end so shots rarely get thru and both teams rarely have their D join the rush.
One of the reasons I'm not convinced that either goalie is playing that incredible is for most of the games neither has faced a ton of shots. Also both teams to me display an astounding ability to miss the net on several wide open chances.
In other words its not that your seeing great defense as much that you're seeing cautious play and mediocre offense. IMO
Watching the Kings throughout the season and the playoffs, there have been MANY times when they have dominated posession time. Agreed, the Kings' defense is very deliberate, but it's also highly effective at keeping pucks out of the net, which is an important part of the game. It sounds to me that you just don't like this particular style of play, which is certainly your right. Like I said before, I like the way the Kings play. It's just a matter of personal opinion.
I can definitely agree that both teams have missed some great opportunities, but that happens in hockey - to everyone.
I do not agree that the goalies haven't been incredible. I thought both Brodeur and Quick were spectacular to watch last night even though neither one had even 30 shots they had to handle.
Can someone explain to me when it is not OK to hit somebody against the boards? One guy for the Devils got whistled for "boarding" and I couldn't determine what was different about that from the rest of the game when dudes are getting hit against the wall all game long.
Also, can someone explain to me why Quick wasn't in the net for that last goal? Was he in the time-out box or something?
Also, can someone explain to me why Quick wasn't in the net for that last goal? Was he in the time-out box or something?
"Boarding" is excessively hard checking. It's basically a judgement call by the ref.
If a team is down by one goal near the end of the game, it is standard practice to pull the goalie to get an additional skater (potential goal-scorer) on the ice and give your team an increased opportunity to tie the game. It allows the other team an easier chace to score, but losing by one goal or two doesn't make a difference. All that counts is win or lose.
They'll call boarding if a guy gets rammed into the boards in a particularly violent manner, usually when the player getting hit is 4 or 5 feet away from the wall and then gets slammed into it. It gets called most often when the offender checks his opponent from behind into the boards. That's a big no-no.
"Pulling the goalie" happens when a team is down a goal (or two) late in the game. The trailing team will substitute their goaltender for an additional skater to try and tie the game up. This usually happens in the final minute of the game. As you saw last night, it carries a degree of risk.
"Pulling the goalie" happens when a team is down a goal (or two) late in the game. The trailing team will substitute their goaltender for an additional skater to try and tie the game up. This usually happens in the final minute of the game. As you saw last night, it carries a degree of risk.
I see! Thanks guys
And now I see what the announcers were saying, how it was a bad call. The guy didn't get hit very hard, and was maybe a foot away from the wall. Looked like he did a little acting there
And now I see what the announcers were saying, how it was a bad call. The guy didn't get hit very hard, and was maybe a foot away from the wall. Looked like he did a little acting there
