2023-24 NHL Season Thread.

[VanillaO]

Making the Conference Finals is a damn good season. Coming back from down 3-1 to be leading Game 7 with under 10 to go is a good effort. Not winning the Cup is not a failure - someone in the series had to lose. Obviously the competitive balance in the NHL has been a little skewed for a while - lots of writers/analysts (and fans) agreed that this series should have been the Cup final just in terms of intensity, competitive balance, and enjoyability. If you choose to see the Hawks losing as a sign of failure, that's really on you. I gotta hand it to 'fans' like you, though... who clearly either just became fans when they started winning, or are so blissfully ignorant of how bad the Hawks were just 7 years ago... making the playoffs once from 1998-2008.

Nazrark hit it on the head. If the Raptors (3rd place in the East) were in the West, they wouldn't even have made the playoffs. As for the Pats, outside of the AFC and NFC West, the AFC East (imo) was the best division.

[Deleted]

Huge accomplishment from the Kings. Take skills to beat both the Hawks and the refereres.

The moral winner was kings. Everything else had been a disgrace after the referee performance.

[Stommped]

Congratulations to Toxigen for winning our bracket challenge. Led from the get go and never looked back.

[Greeney]

According to what I heard today, this is the first time a SC champion is going to have played more than 18 games in the first three rounds.

[draynay]

According to what I heard today, this is the first time a SC champion is going to have played more than 18 games in the first three rounds.

Kings have already played more games than when they won it.

[Stommped]

Didnt realize how badly Carter was offsides on the first Kings goal. Can't believe nobody at NBC caught that.

[Isuckatpvp]

Didnt realize how badly Carter was offsides on the first Kings goal. Can't believe nobody at NBC caught that.

Maybe because it's a lot easier to see that when you're not on the ice and the guys are going 24mph across a line and one guy goes off by about six inches? Oh, refs don't get to freeze frame it while the play is happening either.

[Gumboy]

Oh lawd here comes the excuses for the loss! (Kidding lol :P)

The game is really fast. Probably the hardest to ref major sport there is.

[Stommped]

Maybe because it's a lot easier to see that when you're not on the ice and the guys are going 24mph across a line and one guy goes off by about six inches? Oh, refs don't get to freeze frame it while the play is happening either.

Notice I didn't say "Can't believe the REFS didn't catch that." I said can't believe nobody at NBC caught that, who DO have the advantage of freeze frames. Nice try though.

[Isuckatpvp]

Notice I didn't say "Can't believe the REFS didn't catch that." I said can't believe nobody at NBC caught that, who DO have the advantage of freeze frames. Nice try though.

Of course I noticed that. I also know that what you really want to talk about is how offsides he was on the goal and the fact that the refs missed it. I didn't hear them talking about how Sharps one-hopper into the net was a lucky bounce and I did hear them say it was a "bad goal by Quick". So? What difference does it make if NBC talks about it? So they can discuss how the refs didn't catch it? Or do you just want them to comment on it for observation sake?

[Stommped]

Of course I noticed that. I also know that what you really want to talk about is how offsides he was on the goal and the fact that the refs missed it. I didn't hear them talking about how Sharps one-hopper into the net was a lucky bounce and I did hear them say it was a "bad goal by Quick". So? What difference does it make if NBC talks about it? So they can discuss how the refs didn't catch it? Or do you just want them to comment on it for observation sake?

It was a horrifically blatant offsides that directly led to a goal, you don't think the network owes it to the audience to point that out? Lucky bounce or not it was a bad goal given up by Quick, and they discussed it like they should have. How you think something like that shouldn't be mentioned by the network is completely insane. Calls made or not made by referees are discussed Every. Single. Game.

[VanillaO]

How bout those Whalers! I think this might be their year!

[draynay]

Of course I noticed that.

and ignored it

I also know that what you really want to talk about is

what YOU really want to talk about


what is it about this thread that attracts so many terrible posters?

[Strakha]

It was a horrifically blatant offsides that directly led to a goal, you don't think the network owes it to the audience to point that out? Lucky bounce or not it was a bad goal given up by Quick, and they discussed it like they should have. How you think something like that shouldn't be mentioned by the network is completely insane. Calls made or not made by referees are discussed Every. Single. Game.

they mentioned it on cbc, much better broadcast in my opinion, nbc is kind of a joke network in general. but they also mentioned the ref fiasco a lot more on cbc. game shaping is a part of every professional sport with multi-game playoffs. 7 games is many more millions than 4 games.

[draynay]

Oh man, I'm gonna have to put up with NBC's "A-team" which means I'll be stuck with McGuire for this series. I was enjoying not having to put up with him in Kings games.

[Strakha]

Oh man, I'm gonna have to put up with NBC's "A-team" which means I'll be stuck with McGuire for this series. I was enjoying not having to put up with him in Kings games.

maybe he'll make references to tom barrasso and ron francis. mcguire seems like a nice guy, but he comes off as a tool, kind of like glenn healy for cbc.

[Rennadrel]

Notice I didn't say "Can't believe the REFS didn't catch that." I said can't believe nobody at NBC caught that, who DO have the advantage of freeze frames. Nice try though.

They should be able to determine if he is off side during the review, however I think they were more or less questioning how high the stick was, not that he was on side. It was a shit call either way if you ask me.

- - - Updated - - -

maybe he'll make references to tom barrasso and ron francis. mcguire seems like a nice guy, but he comes off as a tool, kind of like glenn healy for cbc.

Healy isn't near the level of douche that McGuire is.

[Isuckatpvp]

It was a horrifically blatant offsides that directly led to a goal, you don't think the network owes it to the audience to point that out? Lucky bounce or not it was a bad goal given up by Quick, and they discussed it like they should have. How you think something like that shouldn't be mentioned by the network is completely insane. Calls made or not made by referees are discussed Every. Single. Game.

"Horrifically blatant" huh?



You think that is horrifically blatant? You're talking less than half a second for a ref who is almost blocked by the guy coming across the line.

Yeah. Bad goal too. If the puck doesn't bounce of the ice, it's a save. When a puck bounces about a foot off the ice and over the pad that was in position, it's not a bad goal. I mean, unless you think that game winner that Crawford gave up was a bad one too.

Seriously, you lost. Do more with a 5 on 3 next time.

[Greeney]

Of course I noticed that. I also know that what you really want to talk about is how offsides he was on the goal and the fact that the refs missed it. I didn't hear them talking about how Sharps one-hopper into the net was a lucky bounce and I did hear them say it was a "bad goal by Quick". So? What difference does it make if NBC talks about it? So they can discuss how the refs didn't catch it? Or do you just want them to comment on it for observation sake?

I haven't watched it, so can't say if in actuality it's a bad goal or not, but assuming that Stommped isn't licking toads...
Integrity of the game doesn't matter at all? "Because refs missed it, fast game" is ever a decent excuse for allowing a bad goal? You wouldn't be throwing a temper tantrum if your team got screwed out of a significant game (in any sport) because of a clearly bad call? Sounds to me like another reason why there needs to be a coach's challenge (and from what I've seen lately it needs to be at least 1 challenge per period). What's unacceptable is the idea that you can't have integrity where it'll interfere with the pace of the game.

[Stommped]

I like how you post the less incriminating photo. You are assuming I'm using this an excuse as to why the Hawks lost; it's not, it's simply a break that went the Kings way. Comparing it to bad goal given up by Quick, and saying "Here was the Hawks break so it's even 1-1" is laughable. Not even close to the same thing.



It's pretty hard to be any more offsides and have the linesmen miss it at the NHL level.