rick@ucla-cs.UUCP (05/17/85)
<<< here we go islanders, here we go >>>
Well, contrary to all my expectations the Oilers and the Flyers will play
in the Stanley Cup Finals. Given the injuries to the Flyers the Oilers
should win handily, but then they should have beaten Chicago handily.
No matter, the Oilers have an awesome offensive team (that never stops,
but then we have beaten that horse to death :-) ) and will probably set
all kinds of records on the way to a 2nd consecutive (and last) Cup.
I say last because they can't continue to meet teams with as massive
injuries, can they?
--
Rick Gillespie
ARPANET: rick@ucla-locus.ARPA or (soon) rick@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU
UUCP: ...!{cepu|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|ucbvax}!ucla-cs!rick
SPUDNET: ...eye%rick@russet.spud or ...opark.6%rick@russet.spud
(if opark.6 is ever up again)lor@ucla-cs.UUCP (05/17/85)
> Well, contrary to all my expectations the Oilers and the Flyers will play > in the Stanley Cup Finals. Your EXPECTATIONS? The predictions you've made about this year's playoffs are all wishful thinkings. An Islanders vs Hawks Final? Better wait till next century. I wished the Caps would be the champs, but given a little logic, I knew the Flyers would be the team to win the Wales Conference. > Given the injuries to the Flyers the Oilers > should win handily, but then they should have beaten Chicago handily. They should have. However, nobody expects that 11-2 blowout in the first game, which inspired Chicago to extend the series to 6 games. The rout, which changed the complexion of the series, was really a surprise. > No matter, the Oilers have an awesome offensive team (that never stops, > but then we have beaten that horse to death :-) ) and will probably set > all kinds of records on the way to a 2nd consecutive (and last) Cup. Your major problem as a hockey fan is you are still living in 1983. Granted, the Oilers had a flashy but not tough-enough offense, or even immature teams in 1982 and 1983. That's why they busted in the playoffs, buried by the islanders in 4 straight. But this is 1985. An immature offense a couple years ago does not mean an immature offense now. On the other hand, a team that won 4 Cups years ago does not mean it can win a cup today. This is cruel but true - it isn't 1983 anymore. I have the same problem as I, a diehard Redskins fan, am still wishing they are the team of 83, which won the Super Bowl. > I say last because they can't continue to meet teams with as massive > injuries, can they? Well, you should have known a team ALWAYS needs luck to win championships. The most important favor from Lady Luck is to stay healthy. If your team is crippled, there is nobody to blame but her. Don't you think Montreal was lucky in 1976-79 because they had Dryden, Gainey, Lafleur, and Robinson healthy? Didn't the Isles get the smile from Lady Luck because Smith, Potvin, Bossy, and Trottier were available during 1980-83 playoffs? True, the Oilers are extremely lucky because they had no serious injuries to their key players in the 84 and 85 playoffs. But if that's the decision from heaven, there is nothing you can complain about. Tough luck to the Flyers! -- A diehard Capital fan and a diehard Islander hater! -- Eddy Lor ...!(ihnp4,ucbvax)!ucla-cs!lor lor@ucla-locus.arpa
rick@ucla-cs.UUCP (05/17/85)
In article <5484@ucla-cs.ARPA> lor@ucla-cs.UUCP (Kar-Wing Lor) writes: > Your EXPECTATIONS? The predictions you've made about this year's >playoffs are all wishful thinkings. An Islanders vs Hawks Final? Better >wait till next century. Geez, it has gotten to the point where I can't even admit I was wrong without getting flamed. >> No matter, the Oilers have an awesome offensive team (that never stops, >> but then we have beaten that horse to death :-) ) and will probably set >> all kinds of records on the way to a 2nd consecutive (and last) Cup. > > Your major problem as a hockey fan is you are still living >in 1983. Granted, the Oilers had a flashy but not tough-enough >offense, or even immature teams in 1982 and 1983. That's why they busted >in the playoffs, buried by the islanders in 4 straight. >But this is 1985. An immature offense a couple years ago >does not mean an immature offense now. What do you people want? I admit the Oilers are good, so you proceed to tell me again that they are good. Just wait until the Oilers win the Cup, then I have to pay off a bet to Rob Lake (in Edmonton) with full praise for the Oilers. It WILL be painful :-). > Well, you should have known a team ALWAYS needs luck to win >championships. The most important favor from Lady Luck is to stay >healthy. My point was not that the Oilers are healthy, I'm sure they have some nagging injuries. But they keep playing teams that are crippled by injuries to key personnel. > Didn't the Isles get the smile from Lady Luck because >Smith, Potvin, Bossy, and Trottier were available during 1980-83 >playoffs? You mean, for instance, 1982 when Bossy played the entire playoffs with a knee brace because of a vicious attack by a Pittsburgh player in the last regular season game (Bossy was not expected to play for a couple of weeks). He went on to win the Conn Smythe trophy despite playing each game in pain, and having Tiger Williams "shadow" him (in the finals). >-- A diehard Capital fan and a diehard Islander hater! > Eddy Lor No accounting for taste I suppose :-). *** A diehard Oiler HATER, and true-blue Islander fan. -- Rick Gillespie ARPANET: rick@ucla-locus.ARPA or (soon) rick@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU UUCP: ...!{cepu|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|ucbvax}!ucla-cs!rick SPUDNET: ...eye%rick@russet.spud or ...opark.6%rick@russet.spud (if opark.6 is ever up again)
lor@ucla-cs.UUCP (05/19/85)
In article <5491@ucla-cs.ARPA> rick@ucla-cs.UUCP (Richard Gillespie) writes: > Geez, it has gotten to the point where I can't even admit I was wrong > without getting flamed. Right! Next time you make predictions, use logic instead of emotions, otherwise you would be flamed every year. >>> No matter, the Oilers have an awesome offensive team (that never stops, >>> but then we have beaten that horse to death :-) ) and will probably set >>> all kinds of records on the way to a 2nd consecutive (and last) Cup. > >What do you people want? I admit the Oilers are good, so you proceed to >tell me again that they are good. Just wait until the Oilers win the Cup, >then I have to pay off a bet to Rob Lake (in Edmonton) with full praise >for the Oilers. It WILL be painful :-). Are you really admitting the Oilers are good? Sorry, I don't see it in your statements. It only sounds like sour grapes to me. Even though I hate the Islanders very much, I appreciate them (the 80-83 versions) more than you appreciate the current Oilers. >> Well, you should have known a team ALWAYS needs luck to win >>championships. The most important favor from Lady Luck is to stay >>healthy. > >My point was not that the Oilers are healthy, I'm sure they have some >nagging injuries. But they keep playing teams that are crippled by >injuries to key personnel. Similarly, my point is that if the Jets, the Hawks and the Flyers are so unlucky to have key players injured, they simply do NOT deserve to win the Cup. Edmonton thus becomes the only remaining deserving team. It is as simple as that. >> Didn't the Isles get the smile from Lady Luck because >>Smith, Potvin, Bossy, and Trottier were available during 1980-83 >>playoffs? > >You mean, for instance, 1982 when Bossy played the entire playoffs with >a knee brace because of a vicious attack by a Pittsburgh player in the >last regular season game (Bossy was not expected to play for a couple of >weeks). He went on to win the Conn Smythe trophy despite playing each >game in pain, and having Tiger Williams "shadow" him (in the finals). Was Bossy AVAILABLE in 1982? I don't care how much pain he was suffering. If he could play (and win the MVP), his injury was certainly not as serious as Hawerchuk's, Doug Wilson's, or Kerr's. They couldn't even dress for the games. So much for your UNLUCKY Islanders! -- A diehard Capital fan and a diehard Islander hater! -- Eddy Lor ...!(ihnp4,ucbvax)!ucla-cs!lor lor@ucla-locus.arpa
msy@siemens.UUCP (05/22/85)
[[[ and the FLYERS sweep the Oilers in 4 .....]] > Given the injuries to the Flyers the Oilers >should win handily, but then they should have beaten Chicago handily. From watching Flyers vs Oiler play yesterday, I do believe that Flyers should win handily. >No matter, the Oilers have an awesome offensive team (that never stops, >but then we have beaten that horse to death :-) ) and will probably set >all kinds of records on the way to a 2nd consecutive (and last) Cup. All kinds of records as in being shut-out 4 times :-) I was a bit surprise that the Oiler's offense didn't do as much as expected. Flyers should win this one in 5/6. Look for the FLYERS to come out strong in the next few years - with their young talents, they should be a strong force in NHL for years to come. -- A diehard FLYERS fan and a diehard Islander/Oiler hater! Marcus Yoo
jmd@rduxb.UUCP (Joseph M. Dakes, AT&T Bell Labs, Reading, Pa.) (05/22/85)
> Similarly, my point is that if the Jets, the Hawks and the > Flyers are so unlucky to have key players injured, they simply do > NOT deserve to win the Cup. Edmonton thus becomes the only > remaining deserving team. It is as simple as that. > > Eddy Lor > ...!(ihnp4,ucbvax)!ucla-cs!lor > lor@ucla-locus.arpa Injuries are part of any game. Sure it hurts to lose top quality players but hockey is a TEAM game and when player#1 goes down its up to player#2 to get the job done. Simple as that. As for only healthy teams (Edmonton) deserving Lord Stanley's Cup, isn't an injury plagued team which responds to the loss of key personnel by having reserve players rise to the occasion more worthy? Joseph M. Dakes AT&T Bell Laboratories Reading, PA rduxb!jmd
lake@alberta.UUCP (Robert Lake) (05/22/85)
In article <5482@ucla-cs.ARPA> rick@ucla-cs.ARPA (Richard "the neophyte" (:-)) Gillespie writes: > Well, contrary to all my expectations the Oilers and the Flyers will play > in the Stanley Cup Finals. I can understand you having your own ideas, but how can a final between the defending Stanley Cup champions and the #1 team overall be contrary to *ALL* your expectations? > No matter, the Oilers have an awesome offensive team (that never stops, > but then we have beaten that horse to death :-) ) and will probably set > all kinds of records on the way to a 2nd consecutive (and last) Cup. > I say last because they can't continue to meet teams with as massive > injuries, can they? Give them credit Rick! Like Eddy says, this is 1985 and not 1982 or 83. The Oilers have had at least two years to mature and obtain the necessary playoff experience, and (with occasional lapses) they have done that. If they win the Cup this year, they'll win it on their talent and maturity, and not because all the other teams were too crippled to give them a challenge. The fact that the Flyers have breezed to the finals with several of their key players injured indicates to me that the Oilers are going to have their hands full if they are to win their 2nd Cup. Robert Lake (alberta!lake) University of Alberta P.S. While we are at it: A true blue Oiler fan. A Canadien, Capital, and Flyer admirer. A true blue Islander hater. A sympathizer for Leaf fans (:-)).