Stanley Cup Predictions

in General Discussion edited January 2014
Hey, just wanted to start some conversation on who everyone thinks will will the Stanley Cup this year...Since I was raised in Colorado, I am going to have to go with the defending Champs. Nobody else really stands a chance anyway...I believe Tigerwoods would say that every other team is a lot like apple.....DOOMED!!! :cool:


  • Reply 1 of 24
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    I come from the future:

    AP Wire "Fellow Cornellian Joe Nieuwendyk led a newly inspired Devils to their third cup, their second of the new century. Just when you thought they were down for the count, Martin Brodeur stood on his head, leaving his opponent staring up at the rafters in bewilderment. Scott Gomez returned to the lineup in dramatic fashion and set up the winning goal for Lord Stanley's Cup. Afterwards, the team credited former head coach Larry Robinson for remaining the pinnacle of sportsmanship and quiet resolution throughout their difficult season."
  • Reply 2 of 24
    agent302agent302 Posts: 974member
  • Reply 3 of 24
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Cinderella: Montreal, without question (go Saku!!)

    Dark Horse: Phoenix (they're still in, aren't they?)

    My WC Favorite: Colorado - Detroit will lose in the second round or WC Finals, depending on who they play early - they've faced zero adversity this year.

    My EC Favorite: New Jersey - The team (almost) everyone has forgotten and the one nobody wants to play - Nieuwendyk was a huge addition, Langenbrunner isn't bad either; Dallas lost that deal bigtime.

    Winner: Colorado in 7 - too much defensive talent and offensive firepower (especially if Foresberg and Hejduk come back in an earier round, which is likely). They have no weakness, basically. Whereas Detroit's weakness is aging legs and over-confidence.

    Primed for Next Season - with some kick-ass additions at the deadline and a top 5 draft pick to trade away for someone even better: my beloved PENS!! lol

    [ 04-10-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
  • Reply 4 of 24
    gregggregg Posts: 261member
    I predict the Stanley Cup will get no more than a 3 share.
  • Reply 5 of 24
    wormboywormboy Posts: 220member
    Vancouver (if they make the playoffs that is...)
  • Reply 6 of 24
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    [quote]Originally posted by Gregg:

    <strong>I predict the Stanley Cup will get no more than a 3 share.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    That's because we live in a country where people are more fascinated by courtroom litigation and the "reality" of people travelling to exotic locations at no expense of their own, in order to step on other people so that they may earn a million dollars. Oh and because they'd much rather watch Alan Iverson and Mark Cuban (zero class but lots of flash) than Joe Sakic or Niklas Lidstrom (lot's of class, on the ice and off).

    [In a way] I'm glad the Stanley Cup will get a 3 indicates I'm sitting on the correct side of the entertainment (and by extension, the IQ) fence. No offense....

    [ 04-11-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
  • Reply 7 of 24
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    I would have to say the Boston Bruins.
  • Reply 8 of 24
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Boston's not too hot right now, but they certainly have shot if Dafoe plays well in net and Thornton comes back strong. I think it would be pretty humorous if the played (and beat) Colorado...imagine how Ray Borque would feel at that moment.
  • Reply 9 of 24
    tigerwoods99tigerwoods99 Posts: 2,633member
    F8ck that. Let's talk NBA Playoffs

    Go Pacers!!1
  • Reply 10 of 24
    agent302agent302 Posts: 974member
    [quote]Originally posted by TigerWoods99:

    <strong>F8ck that. Let's talk NBA Playoffs

    Go Pacers!!1</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Umm, yeah, the NBA is the worst major sports league in the U.S.

    I still say Sharks!
  • Reply 11 of 24
    ijerryijerry Posts: 615member
    Moogs, youcouldn't have stated it better...And Tiger, come on, those players you worship can't even play if they have a hang nail on their pinky. The NBA really stands for the National Baby Association. And dont even get me started with the whole turf toe thing in the NFL. Hockey players are simply the best athletes, most durable and dependable, and they are actually role models; work ethic, physical conditioning and mental toughness. So lets not compare "I hurt my pinky, take me out." to "Yeah, so I broke my jaw, I'll play." Nuff said. Go Avs!!!
  • Reply 12 of 24
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Oh no doubt. The NBA are a bunch of punk bitches compared to the NHL. There's no question (as someone who has played several sports at the organized level) that to play the game well, hockey requires a more talented athlete than any of the other four major sports. If you want to be good, you MUST:

    1. Have excellent eye-hand coordination (baseball)

    2. Have excellent endurance, leg strength and agility (soccer, basketball)

    3. Have excellent "field vision" and reflexes (soccer)

    4. Be tough as nails, because you're going to get crunched, decked and jabbed (football, boxing)

    ...and you have to manage all this while doing that little thing we like to call skating. Good fvckin luck getting a majority of athletes from the other sports to do that, though it would be pretty easy for a good hockey player to be a decent soccer, basketball, baseball or even football player at some level. A skilled forward could make a good hitter or fielder in baseball, a good defenseman could make a good safety in football, a good center could make a good soccer center, etc.

    Basically, everyone (that I know) who has played multiple sports in their life reaches the same conclusion. It's much harder to master the game of hockey than any other sport. Oh did I mention

    5. You have to put the team's interests before your own (try that Iverson!).

    Obviously, soccer is a close second in total skills required, but you don't have to be anywhere near as tough. Soccer players love to get their shin banged, fall to the ground and writhe in pain (to draw the ref's pitty), only to walk back on the field 2 minutes later as if they never felt better. Pussies.

    [ 04-12-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
  • Reply 13 of 24
    tigerwoods99tigerwoods99 Posts: 2,633member
    I agree. I don't like the NBA that much. Plus the fact that it's all fixed for marketing purposes. I like the Jazz & Pacers though.

    Anywayz it's Masters weekend~! A tradition like no other! That's what I'm talkin about!
  • Reply 14 of 24
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    I cherish these surely dying days where hockey players are humble and team-oriented instead of Pepsi-sponsored monuments to self-glorification. It's happened to all the other major sports so it's only a matter of time. Already, coaches find their players have little self-motivation unless it involves more immediate exposure for them. So it's going downhill.

    In the meantime, as much as I am still burned about Joe Sakic's Stanley Cup performance last year, at least he is a consumate gentleman. Some day, the Tie Domis of the world will command more respect. And that is when I stop watching.
  • Reply 15 of 24
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    I dunno...people who know the game know there are goons and that those specific guys are just knuckle-heads who are on the ice to knock guys a round and get under the other team's skin. They've always been there to some degree and will always be there.

    There's no doubt hockey needs to make some minor changes to the way the game is officiated. Fighting should be an automatic 10 minute game misconduct (and not a 5 minute major) and the clutcing and grabbing crap in the NZ has got to go. In any case, there are ways to rough up another player without having to drop the gloves, but the good news is that fighting is much less common during the playoffs because players know a couple bad penalties (and ensuing goals for the other team) could literally mean the end of their season.

    As for the money, the CBA will have to be redone in 2004, no question. No hockey player (or any other athlete) should make more than 20% of his team's payroll, and the payrolls shouldn't be artificially tilted the way they are now. The Rangers had something like a $70M payroll this year(proving once again Stanley Cups cannot be bought), while the Pens' was around $30M. Further, if Jagr had stayed on with the Pens, he would've accounted for 30%+ of their entire payroll. That's fvcked.

    Bottom line is the same as baseball but on a different scale; the small market teams are getting squished (especially the storied ones like Montreal, Edmonton and Calgary). Bettman has decided the current 30 team setup is the way it will stay, which is good, and he wants the existing Canadian teams to be a part of that (no more relocations). He's also got to try and make sure clubs like Pittsburgh and Carolina and even Buffalo have some protection against the big market influences.

    A new arena is the best way and Pittsburgh is next on the list with the league's oldest building (and some of its biggest fans).Bettman and the NHL board of governers has been teaming up with Lemiuex to convince the state of PA that a new building is warranted -- especially since the Pirates (Pittsburgh's third favorite son) got a new park last year. They were making good inroads until Pens advocate Tom Ridge was reassigned to Washington, now things aren't so certain.

    Only time will tell but in general, I would be happy to know that no player was going to make more than $10M a year for the next few years. It's still a ridiculous amount, but relative to the other three sports, that's downright humble for a top-notch player. And the sacrifices required of hockey players are at least double what other athletes must endure. That alone will keep the game in a different class. All you can compare hockey to are the other sports, not other lines of work. And if you do that, you will see that hockey will remain more about team than individuals, more about work ethic than marketing image, etc.

    But, hockey will continue to be in a class all its own I think, even if some of these changes don't come right away.

    [ 04-13-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
  • Reply 16 of 24
    willoughbywilloughby Posts: 1,457member
    You're all smoking crack. Its going to be the Flyers!!
  • Reply 17 of 24
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Get ahtta heeeeea!

    They got the talent but they don't have the one thing all the other Cup teams have - a stand out leader. No Lemieux, no Sakic, no Yzerman, no Cup. Who's gonna lead you guys, Dan McGillis? Keith Primeau? Bob Clarke (thanks for giving us Manderville for free Bob!)?! LeClaire comes close but no ceegar. Gets hurt too much.

    Besides, I think New Jersey is gonna house you guys. They're peaking at exactly the right time. Played their best hockey all year in the last month. Brodeur is hot, they got some serious Cup experience, they're deep and now they got Niewendyke to top it all off.

    Youz guyz iz toast!
  • Reply 18 of 24
    jesperasjesperas Posts: 524member
    After today...Bruins.
  • Reply 19 of 24
    willoughbywilloughby Posts: 1,457member
    [quote]Originally posted by Moogs:


    Besides, I think New Jersey is gonna house you guys. </strong><hr></blockquote>

    Ok, maybe they won't go all the way, but the Flyers will not lose to the Devils this year. NO WAY. I'll put money on it. I think the Flyers will be the Eastern Conference champs.

  • Reply 20 of 24
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member eh? How much money? I might have to set up a paypal account for this
Sign In or Register to comment.