The Rite of Spring

[CS85]

There's just no story about this. The Kings as an 8 seed making the finals seems exciting on the surface, but I think the national sports audience (that already shows half-hearted interest in hockey) won't be captivated by another Los Angeles team vying for another sports title. Then you have the New Jersey Devils whose primary success came right before the lockout in some of the most uninteresting stanley cup series in recent memory. Again, another market that has no national resonance and whose playoff story was not the most mind blowing.

Will it be a fun series for hockey fans? Certainly. But does it have the buildup of a classic? Not on paper at least.

[HedleyLamarr]

For the record, I don't think the Rangers ever got any "help" from the officials. Not before LA made it to the Finals, and certainly not in the two games played afterwards. The "they wanted a LA/NY final and nudged the officiating to help facilitate that" theory fell flat tonight.

The Devils are practically New York City. They're playing home games like 10 miles away from Madison Square Garden.

So the Rangers went 10-10 in the playoffs. That's a dubious achievement. I had a feeling that team was never as good as advertised. All they ever did was lie in front of shots.

He made strides this season by winning a couple rounds, but I'm still not convinced that Lundqvist is a "big game" goalie.

He's still got a losing record in playoff games (by 5 games still). He's got a blown 3-1 series lead to his 'credit'. He lost what amounts to a Game 7 when the Flyers beat the Rangers via the shootout in Game 82 a couple years ago. The Rangers barely got past the #8 Senators and #7 Capitals.

He's a good goalie, but if I'm a GM and needed to win one game, there's a few other goalies I'd pick before Lundqvist.

[Billy B]

I did some very quick research and I think this will be the first Stanley Cup Final with two American captains.

[IceCap]

For the record, I don't think the Rangers ever got any "help" from the officials. Not before LA made it to the Finals, and certainly not in the two games played afterwards. The "they wanted a LA/NY final and nudged the officiating to help facilitate that" theory fell flat tonight.

The Devils are practically New York City. They're playing home games like 10 miles away from Madison Square Garden.

Maybe, but I'm pretty sure it's been established that the Devils don't have a large NYC following, and don't pull in the monster tv ratings you would expect from a New York market team. If you're going to play the "the NHL wanted a LA/NY Stanley Cup Finals and fixed things accordingly" card then you can't suddenly say "well New Jersey is close enough to prove my point" now that the Rangers were knocked out without obvious help from the officials.

The ECF was Rangers/Devils. If the NHL was truly trying to "nudge" the playoffs towards a LA/NY match-up (as was suggested) then the Rangers would have been on the receiving end of more then a few generous calls. No one, if they want to fix it so a New York area team makes it to the Finals, chooses the Devils over the Rangers.

So yeah, the "well the Kings got a ton of help because the NHL wants a LA/NY Final and now that LA's in you just watch, the Rangers will get the help they need" argument kind of fell flat.

Either that or the NHL is so incompetent that in their efforts to fix it that way they actually gave the edge to the Devils. Which wouldn't be all that shocking, actually.

[The_Admiral]

The Rangers were taken to the limit by a mediocre Sens team and an even more mediocre Caps team. Doesn't look like they got a lot of help to me.

[IceCap]

The Rangers were taken to the limit by a mediocre Sens team and an even more mediocre Caps team. Doesn't look like they got a lot of help to me.

Pretty much. The whole "the NHL wanted a LA/NY Finals" thing never really panned out. As much as you want to argue about the Kings getting help here or there, the Rangers never got any. Which pretty kills the theory right away.

[oddball]

There's just no story about this. The Kings as an 8 seed making the finals seems exciting on the surface, but I think the national sports audience (that already shows half-hearted interest in hockey) won't be captivated by another Los Angeles team vying for another sports title. Then you have the New Jersey Devils whose primary success came right before the lockout in some of the most uninteresting stanley cup series in recent memory. Again, another market that has no national resonance and whose playoff story was not the most mind blowing.

Will it be a fun series for hockey fans? Certainly. But does it have the buildup of a classic? Not on paper at least.

Wow! Talk about complete non-sense. Not exciting? A team that beat the #1, #2, and #3 seeds convincingly is not of interest? Throw in they replaced their coach, had a young defenseman struggle and then find his game in the playoffs, made a late season trade, have a Captain that was rumored to be traded and is now hot, and a Vezina Trophy contending goaltender. Yeah nothing to get excited about there. And their opponent, has a new coach this year, has a top-notch free agent Captain who's looking to score big at the bank with a good series in the Finals where everyone's watching. They have two very good young players in Adam Henrique and Adam Larsson, a defenseman that has never scored and now thinks he's Bobby Orr, a top-tiered goal scorer in Kovalchuk who's been called selfish and has turned into a very good two-way player, and let's not forget about their Hall of Fame goaltender. Yep. Nothing of interest to anyone. So why not let's do like all Blackhawk fans and just turn the television off or better yet, throw in the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals to relive our only good memory. I hate to say this, but you show absolutely no knowledge of hockey or appreciation of the game.

[zpqmaowl]

This is going to be the first finals where I watch all of the games.

[CS85]

Here's what you ignored:

Will it be a fun series for hockey fans? Certainly.

Here's where your post's integrity went skidding off the edge of oblivion:

Nothing of interest to anyone. So why not let's do like all Blackhawk fans and just turn the television off or better yet' date=' throw in the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals to relive our only good memory. I hate to say this, but you show absolutely no knowledge of hockey or appreciation of the game.[/quote']

For that, I applaud your reckless use of fast-reply. I was talking about the national vague sports audience's perception of these finals, and I believe my points are fair. You decided to wave the "I HATE BLACKHAWKS FANS" flag and dismiss me as an idiot. I know you're excited as a Kings fan, and as a hockey fan I will probably tune in here and there to these finals, but seriously learn how to properly read and interpret a post instead of just going into some butthurt rant about what a terrible fan I am because I'm not that excited to watch your team in the finals.

[Cujo]

If the NHL were so goddamn concerned about television ratings, they would just go back to the Original Six.

As far as a fan interest standpoint, it's not all that bad. First off, no team from the southeast region of the US, which is an automatic win. I think most casual fans can look beyond seeding in this one, and are able to tolerate both teams. Also, the "Brodeur factor". He's a highly respected player. Fans will have interest in if he can go out on top.

[CS85]

If the NHL were so goddamn concerned about television ratings, they would just go back to the Original Six.

As far as a fan interest standpoint, it's not all that bad. First off, no team from the southeast region of the US, which is an automatic win. I think most casual fans can look beyond seeding in this one, and are able to tolerate both teams. Also, the "Brodeur factor". He's a highly respected player. Fans will have interest in if he can go out on top.

I'm not trying to stir up the "Ratings Determine Title Merit" argument. It's up to the players to make this one an exciting draw, to etch their place in hockey annals. If the games are exciting, which with these two particular teams is more than likely, the viewership will come, but when the only household name in this series is an aging goalie who's already got his name on the cup it's not as compelling. This finals series can make some of these guys who are stars among hockey fans into household names like Brodeur but it's going to happen progressively since there's no immediate draw that you can roll on page 1 to get the general non-hockey sports fan's attention.

But hey, I'm just another stupid blackhawks fan, so what do I know, right?

[Kramerica Industries]

For the record, I don't think the Rangers ever got any "help" from the officials. Not before LA made it to the Finals, and certainly not in the two games played afterwards. The "they wanted a LA/NY final and nudged the officiating to help facilitate that" theory fell flat tonight.

The Devils are practically New York City. They're playing home games like 10 miles away from Madison Square Garden.

So the Rangers went 10-10 in the playoffs. That's a dubious achievement. I had a feeling that team was never as good as advertised. All they ever did was lie in front of shots.

He made strides this season by winning a couple rounds, but I'm still not convinced that Lundqvist is a "big game" goalie.

He's still got a losing record in playoff games (by 5 games still). He's got a blown 3-1 series lead to his 'credit'. He lost what amounts to a Game 7 when the Flyers beat the Rangers via the shootout in Game 82 a couple years ago. The Rangers barely got past the #8 Senators and #7 Capitals.

He's a good goalie, but if I'm a GM and needed to win one game, there's a few other goalies I'd pick before Lundqvist.

How much of it is Lundqvist's fault when the Rangers offense routinely played dud games this post-season?

In the games they lost, they scored: 2, 2, 0, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 3, 2.

If you want to say a goaltender of Hank's caliber should've been able to steal a few of those two goal games, be my guest (and he did, by the way, in games 3/7 vs. Ottawa and games 3/7 vs. Washington (triple OT!)). I really don't think it's all Hank's fault the Rangers offense was so lifeless this postseason. He can only do so much.

(And Game 82 vs. Philadelphia - one goal in 65 minutes of play. And the Rangers were facing a team whose goaltending consisted of Brian Boucher and Michael friggen Leighton. Again, not really his fault.)

I did some very quick research and I think this will be the first Stanley Cup Final with two American captains.

Would've been an All-America captainship with Ryan Callahan, too.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I did some very quick research and I think this will be the first Stanley Cup Final with two American captains.

It'd have to be, since there's only been one American captain winner and that Final did not have 2, correct? Should only need quick research.

[jkrdevil]

Wooo! That is all I have to say

[Island_Style]

I think this is a badass Stanley Cup. Both teams are on it. What more do you people want? Lets just make it like college football and vote in the biggest name with the best record.

[The_Admiral]

Yeah, I think it'll be a good series. It's easy to give the Devils short shrift because they exploited a loophole to play the worst team in the first round, and didn't have to worry about the superior Penguins or Bruins, but hey, they won 12 games and beat a dazzling Flyers offense, so what more can you ask of them, really.

[IceCap]

I'm excited.

[JQK]

Does anybody outside of New Jersey care about the Devils?

I get a 2007 Ottawa feel from them- outside the local area, is anybody REALLY clamoring for them to win it all?

Don't really care...

[IceCap]

Does anybody outside of New Jersey care about the Devils?

I get a 2007 Ottawa feel from them- outside the local area, is anybody REALLY clamoring for them to win it all?

Someone seems butthurt.

[The_Admiral]

I was clamoring for Ottawa to win it all