All Forums | NHL Betting

Brutal Conn Smythe Selection

...

Participants:

Search

Posts: 40

MJ2345

Veteran

Joined: Jul, 2008

Posts: 4731

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 12:24 AM ET #26

Crawford should have won it

0

bob696969

Veteran

Joined: Feb, 2008

Posts: 4049

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 12:28 AM ET #27

It was truly a team effort and a number of different hawks could have been picked. there was no single hawk that had a higher "WAR" than anyone else. crawford was amazing the red wings game 7 and game 1 of the finals, but he didnt dominate like past goalie winners have carried their teams. kane singlehandedly won a few games for the hawks himself and recievex the trophy by default because the lead the team in scoring and no one else stood out.

0

bob696969

Veteran

Joined: Feb, 2008

Posts: 4049

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 12:30 AM ET #28

The trophy is decided by the hockey writers. crawford did not have enough memorable "stolen games" over the course of the playoffs to sway the voters.

0

LeRinkRat

Legend

Joined: Dec, 2001

Posts: 85256

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 12:30 AM ET #29

Quote Originally Posted by MJ2345:

Crawford should have won it

even Kane said that. thought he would have to at least get a goal Game 6 BUT I guess it's the old "voters most recent memory" like it usually is

0

LeRinkRat

Legend

Joined: Dec, 2001

Posts: 85256

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 12:32 AM ET #30

in ANY case it's a nice hit for those that took Kane. I saw +1800 and +2000 prices

0

Polar_Bear

Legend

Joined: Oct, 2008

Posts: 45939

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 1:16 AM ET #31

Quote Originally Posted by bob696969:

It was truly a team effort and a number of different hawks could have been picked. there was no single hawk that had a higher "WAR" than anyone else. crawford was amazing the red wings game 7 and game 1 of the finals, but he didnt dominate like past goalie winners have carried their teams. kane singlehandedly won a few games for the hawks himself and recievex the trophy by default because the lead the team in scoring and no one else stood out.

He scored 2 goals in game 5 of the finals, exactly which games were these other games he singlehandedly won???

Because I can list you some games that Crawford did win them by playing incredible and winning when they did not play well in front of him. I can list you a few games Seabrooke won which is a bonus because he is busy playing all world type defense for 30 minutes per game while being an incredible leader and leading the team's comeback against Detroit when he had to pick his Captain up.....Keith 30 minutes per game of all world defense.

Sorry no offense there is no argument as far as i'm concerned. Kane is very gifted offensively and he does that very well and it end there. He does not hit, he is relatively poor defensively, he does not really backcheck.

We're all entitled to our opinion but Brian Bickel the role player single handedly won more games these playoffs for the Hawks than Patricia Kane did. I can tell you the little poster boy is American though and I think that helped him a lot in the voting which is done by a bunch of out clowns that have never played a game of hockey in their lives.

The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.

0

WeMoveLines

Veteran

Joined: Mar, 2011

Posts: 3059

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 1:24 AM ET #32

Crawford was not deserving in my opinion. Yes he was good but not outstanding. He had his off games. The team won it. Bickell should've won it he did a lot of everything out there scored 9 goals in the playoffs scored the tying goal. The payout was too high I guess. That guy will be a hot commodity this offseason.

0

bhawksfan

Veteran

Joined: Jan, 2012

Posts: 4266

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 1:30 AM ET #33

The problem is Polar Bear, I could argue any of the following players deserved the conn smythe just as much as Crawford or Kane, it was such a team effort all the way, no one really stood out....

Duncan Keith
Brent Seabrook
Jonathan Toews
Bryan Bickell

I think the reason Kane won was because of the Hat Trick that really stood out vs the Kings in that closing game, then he scored both goals to give the series lead to Chicago last game. Its just most recent performance that naturally sticks to voters heads...in credit to Kane, he did stickhandle/dance around the entire Bruins team that really caused havoc at that end and led to the goal (dig out --> Keith great pass --> Toews another great pass--> Bickell kaboom).

0

MJ2345

Veteran

Joined: Jul, 2008

Posts: 4731

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 1:41 AM ET #34

Quote Originally Posted by WeMoveLines:

Crawford was not deserving in my opinion. Yes he was good but not outstanding. He had his off games. The team won it. Bickell should've won it he did a lot of everything out there scored 9 goals in the playoffs scored the tying goal. The payout was too high I guess. That guy will be a hot commodity this offseason.

That funny becaude i will bet you think RASK was deserving .Let me tell something with out cRAWFORD THEY LOSE GAME ONE AWESOME IN TRIPLE ot AND in this last game was awesome to keep the surge of the Bruins to just one goal.Quit being so BIAS people and openyour eyes gezzuz

0

Polar_Bear

Legend

Joined: Oct, 2008

Posts: 45939

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 1:41 AM ET #35

Quote Originally Posted by bhawksfan:

The problem is Polar Bear, I could argue any of the following players deserved the conn smythe just as much as Crawford or Kane, it was such a team effort all the way, no one really stood out....

Duncan Keith
Brent Seabrook
Jonathan Toews
Bryan Bickell

I think the reason Kane won was because of the Hat Trick that really stood out vs the Kings in that closing game, then he scored both goals to give the series lead to Chicago last game. Its just most recent performance that naturally sticks to voters heads...in credit to Kane, he did stickhandle/dance around the entire Bruins team that really caused havoc at that end and led to the goal (dig out --> Keith great pass --> Toews another great pass--> Bickell kaboom).

Maybe other guys that played the game a lot would disagree with me I don't know or maybe it's because I played for years and I have more of an appreciation for the guys that can do it all. Seabrook and Keith both carry the entire team defensively. Anyways i'm done talking about the cocky little puke that liks to beat up can drivers.

Congrats to the hawks backers and to whoever had kane...

Seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeya

The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.

0

Polar_Bear

Legend

Joined: Oct, 2008

Posts: 45939

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 1:43 AM ET #36

Quote Originally Posted by MJ2345:

That funny becaude i will bet you think RASK was deserving .Let me tell something with out cRAWFORD THEY LOSE GAME ONE AWESOME IN TRIPLE ot AND in this last game was awesome to keep the surge of the Bruins to just one goal.Quit being so BIAS people and openyour eyes gezzuz

You're wasting your time, once people get something in their heads the blinders go on. Media runs this crap and a bunch of fat fuks that never played a game in their life and have no clue what wins hockey games vote on this stuff.

The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.

0

clepto

Legend

Joined: Aug, 2001

Posts: 34488

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 2:54 AM ET #37

Kane is clutch. He deserved it. IMO.

0

WeMoveLines

Veteran

Joined: Mar, 2011

Posts: 3059

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 3:51 AM ET #38

Quote Originally Posted by MJ2345:

That funny becaude i will bet you think RASK was deserving .Let me tell something with out cRAWFORD THEY LOSE GAME ONE AWESOME IN TRIPLE ot AND in this last game was awesome to keep the surge of the Bruins to just one goal.Quit being so BIAS people and openyour eyes gezzuz

LOL how am I bias? I didn't care who won. Rask would've been deserving had the Bruins won but they didn't so no. I just said Crawford was good just not outstanding. Ya he was good in games 1 and 6. There were 4 games inbetween you know. And IMO there are more deserving players then him - Bickell, Toews, Kane, Keith. I thought Bickell would win it for sure and if not Keith but whatever. I don't even care I didn't have money on it or care who won. But you sound like a pretty smart guy you must know better than me.

And PB - I don't understand your comment to this guys comment. I basically echoed your Bickell deserving it?

0

Polar_Bear

Legend

Joined: Oct, 2008

Posts: 45939

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 8:28 AM ET #39

WML, that wasn't aimed at you, just in general as I think a handfull of guys deserved it more than kane, however I don't agree on crawford I thought he was fantastic.

I see a lot of people just referring to the finals but the conn smythe is for the entire post season.....seabrook, bickel, crawford, keith, toews all did more these playoffs to get their team through them than kane imo

The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.

0

MJ2345

Veteran

Joined: Jul, 2008

Posts: 4731

Posted: Jun. 25, 2013 - 10:28 AM ET #40

Quote Originally Posted by WeMoveLines:

LOL how am I bias? I didn't care who won. Rask would've been deserving had the Bruins won but they didn't so no. I just said Crawford was good just not outstanding. Ya he was good in games 1 and 6. There were 4 games inbetween you know. And IMO there are more deserving players then him - Bickell, Toews, Kane, Keith. I thought Bickell would win it for sure and if not Keith but whatever. I don't even care I didn't have money on it or care who won. But you sound like a pretty smart guy you must know better than me.

And PB - I don't understand your comment to this guys comment. I basically echoed your Bickell deserving it?

He actually played good in games 2,3,5 also.The only game he really played bad in was the 6-5 game