Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: kcarrera and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Sports and Redskins  |  RSS

Blackhawks take Game 1

Well, that was a wild way to start the Stanley Cup finals, wasn't it?

I'm not sure what's weirder. The fact that Chicago and Philadelphia combined for 11 goals in a wacky 6-5 Hawks' win, or that the Phillies' ace Roy Halladay pitched a perfect game to steal some of the spotlight away from Philadelphia's hockey team?

Anyway, check out my recap from United Center here.

The big question tomorrow will be whether Flyers Coach Peter Laviolette will go back to Cinderella story Michael Leighton in Game 2. Leighton looked shaky in surrendering five goals on 20 shots before being replaced in the second period by Brian Boucher, who was much more solid in stopping 11 of 12 shots. I'm betting on Leighton, though we might not know the answer until Monday.

By Tarik El-Bashir  |  May 30, 2010; 12:53 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bettman: D.C. to host outdoor game in '2-3 years'
Next: Leighton or Boucher? Laviolette not saying (updated)

Comments

"in a wacky 6-5 Flyers' win"

Might want to fix that!

Posted by: dimagus | May 30, 2010 2:47 AM | Report abuse

If the Flyers did not get a penalty, how can they surrender a short handed goal?? Please explain that one to me Mr.Tarik.

Posted by: danpoulin | May 30, 2010 6:13 AM | Report abuse

@ danpoulin

you know what a shorthanded goal is?

Posted by: joek443 | May 30, 2010 7:20 AM | Report abuse

If the Flyers did not get a penalty, how can they surrender a short handed goal?? Please explain that one to me Mr.Tarik.

Posted by: danpoulin

Anyone remember the noise the Aflak duck made while talking with Yogi Berra?

Posted by: Steve_R | May 30, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Wow.......... Just wow.


Cordially,
RBlatch

Posted by: rblatch45 | May 30, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

danpoulin, he said shorthanded, not power play. If you need more explanation... then you shouldn't be on here.

Posted by: timmyv38 | May 30, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

That was a hell of a game.

Posted by: j3rockstar | May 30, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Looked a lot like pond hockey to me.

Posted by: dccitizen1 | May 30, 2010 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Also, even though I hope that Chicago wins the Cup, I don't understand why their fans have to stand up and cheer throughout the entire National Anthem. Seems kind of stupid and disrespectful to me. Then again, so does shouting "O" and "Red".

Posted by: dccitizen1 | May 30, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

If Philly thinks they can out gun the Hawks then this will be a quick series.

Hawks have to much fire power for the Flyers. I have said along that Phillys goalie had not really been tested by a team with guns and soon as he faced one he gives up 5 goals on 20 shots...enough said.

This is the Hawks series to lose. Flyers should give in to the fact of being happy they made it this far.
Will be interesting to see the adjustments the Flyers make.

Posted by: jotay131 | May 30, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

dccitizen, when it started, it was actually cheering for the National Anthem during the 1st Gulf War. To me, it's understandable - but I wouldn't personally do it. Just like I don't yell "Oh" or "Red" during the Anthem down here.

Posted by: timmyv38 | May 30, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

jotay, I'm with you. The Flyers have not had to face a team with strong offense until now, and they don't have the right personnel or system to handle it. All Chicago has to do is tighten up their defense, and this will be over in 5.

Posted by: timmyv38 | May 30, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

jotay, I'm with you. The Flyers have not had to face a team with strong offense until now, and they don't have the right personnel or system to handle it. All Chicago has to do is tighten up their defense, and this will be over in 5.

Posted by: timmyv38 | May 30, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

the Flyers handled Montreal who had enough offense to beat the highest scoring team on earth.

Chicago will probably win the series but NOT just because they have more offense. Because as it was the case against the sharks, they're just a little bit better than philly in all areas... offense, defense, goaltending and special teams.

Also they have enough grit to match the toughness of the flyers.

Posted by: joek443 | May 30, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Montreal won against both the Caps and Pens with defense, not offense. New Jersey was a defensive team, as was Boston, as was Montreal. Chicago is the first strong offensive team the Flyers have had to face.

The last part you said was true, but it doesn't take away from the fact that the Flyers have not played a strong offensive team until now.

Posted by: timmyv38 | May 30, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

The last part you said was true, but it doesn't take away from the fact that the Flyers have not played a strong offensive team until now.

Posted by: timmyv38 | May 30, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

I know what you're getting at, you think that had the Caps matched up against the flyers, the Caps would have won because they have more offense.

I believe you're dead wrong if you believe that. the flyers are just as good as Montreal on defense as they proved against them in the series and they have more offense than the Habs.

the Caps couldn't handle the midget forwards of the Habs, what chance would their defense have against the flyers who have much bigger, toughter and stronger forwards who are even better than the forwards of the Habs?

they would have had no problem scoring against the Caps' defense. and if they thought Hal Gill was a monster on defense, think they would have had better luck against Pronger??

Posted by: joek443 | May 30, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

joek443, I see your thought process except the Caps would have crushed Philly if they had played. In the regular season the Caps were 3-0-1 (they were 1-3-0 against us) against Philly scoreing 5,8,4, and 5 so Philly's big bad D couldn't do much against the Caps. However againt the Habs in the regular season the Caps were 2-1-1 (and they were the same against us) against the Habs scoring 5,4,4,2 and one of the 4s was really a 3 with a SO win gaining an extra goal that wasn't really scored. I know the regular season isn't the playoffs but in the regular season the Habs we very even with us and Philly wasn't they got only one win and that was the first meeting and it went to OT. I think while the Habs were small they were also faster then the Philly players which forced the Caps to have to make quicker decisions and make more mistakes.

Posted by: icehammer97 | May 30, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

It's really easy to say something like "The Caps would've crushed the Flyers", based on hindsight information. Regular season series don't mean squat, either.


I don't really care if the Caps could have beat the Flyers, the fact of the matter is is that they never played the Flyers this year, so it comes off as trying to save face for the Caps.

Posted by: richmondphil | May 30, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

From last thread, RE; undapants2 suggestions;


Armstrong wanted 3 mil/yr + from ATL. No thank you.

What is with this Della Rovere obsession? There are others in front of him. Barring some sort of miraculous showing at training camp, Della Rovere isn't making the team next year.

Arnott is old and makes 5 mil/yr+. If he doesn't perform (not to mention he's been injury prone recently), we have another Nylander on our hands.

Posted by: richmondphil | May 29, 2010 6:19 PM |


I see you commented back on timmy's comment, but not mine.


Posted by: richmondphil | May 30, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

jotay, I'm with you. The Flyers have not had to face a team with strong offense until now, and they don't have the right personnel or system to handle it. All Chicago has to do is tighten up their defense, and this will be over in 5.

Posted by: timmyv38 | May 30, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

"the Flyers handled Montreal who had enough offense to beat the highest scoring team on earth."


Posted by: joek443 | May 30, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

You may want to re-word that statement. Montreal beat the highest scoring team in the NHL with a good old fashion trap executed pretty darn good. They didn't score that many goals against the Caps. They played with the mindset that they just needed one more than the Caps scored and it worked for them.
Philly used their size to its advantage and it work. Caps wouldn't or couldn't do the same.
Philly this year has not done to well against teams with firepower so we shall see how it goes.
My money still on the Hawks in 5 maybe 6.

Posted by: jotay131 | May 30, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

the Caps need a Dave Bolland type center more than a Jason Arnott type... Bolland is like his old junior coach Dale Hunter with more speed.

Posted by: joek443 | May 29, 2010 11:51 PM

Eh, Caps need SOMEONE who is capable of playing on the 2nd line well enough. I don't care if he's a good two-way player like Bolland, or if he's an offensive guy like Arnott.

The problem I have with Arnott is his age and proneness to injury.

Posted by: richmondphil | May 30, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Also, I'm really not seeing how Bolland is a Hunter with more speed. They don't play anything alike.

Posted by: richmondphil | May 30, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I've been reading all the trade proposals posted here by everyone and here are my thoughts.

1) I will admit we need a first line center but don't think Arnott (of Nashville) would be the answer. I saw all the comparisons to Nylander. Funny thing, last summer, the blogger on "Peerless Prognosticator" was posting a series of "What If" posts, as in what would have happened if the Caps hadn't won the draft lottery in 2005 and ended up with the third pick. One of the things that happened was the Caps signing Arnott instead of Nylander (and also becoming an albatross contract.)

2) I also read the Semin for Staal proposal. While not a totally illogical proposal from the standpoint of mutual needs, my emotions cry out "No". I remember our trade with the Pens to get Jagr and recall how that worked out (or didn't). I just don't like to imagine Semin in a Penguins jersey on the line with Crosby (or with Malkin, if they prefer).

I'll admit the Caps do not have a balanced lineup. My own feeling is trade Fleischmann since he's comparatively superfluous given that we have too many wingers. Acquiring Volchenkov would be great provided the price is right. Otherwise, I'd say acquire Hamhuis or Zbynek Michalek for defense. And try to also acquire a 2nd line center. I figure that getting Hamhuis or Michalek instead of Volch would give us a better chance of affording a good 2nd line center.

Posted by: CapsFan75 | May 30, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

just opinion Della Rovere looked lost with the Bears in the 2 playoffs games he was in this season.

Posted by: cocorules | May 30, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company