The Ultimate Fantasy Hockey Experience
http://bbkl.ca/
Mash wroteCOLONIts a good deal for NSH for sure, but I think you guys are failing realizing how SICK Mikko Koviu is at H2H
You have an offer for me yet?KapG wroteCOLONMash wroteCOLONIts a good deal for NSH for sure, but I think you guys are failing realizing how SICK Mikko Koviu is at H2H
You do have a point there.
I still like it for Nashville though.
Shep wroteCOLON and has a Conn Smythe.
I wouldn't say NEVER, if both player have career years (or close to it) there is an opportunity to build around them, but it is a very difficult, and unlikely feat to accomplish.The Devil wroteCOLONAlso, anyone with Gaborik and Malkin on their team at the same time will NEVER ever win the BBKL championship.
Does anyone other than Nick believe Malkin didn't deserve the Conn Smythe that year? I've had this conversation with him several times, and failed to reach a consensus, so I would like to hear everyone else's opinion.facey wroteCOLONShep wroteCOLON and has a Conn Smythe.
Seriously, referencing the awards chosen by the hockey writers is one of the weakest arguments IMO, on over half the awards every year they seem to pick the wrong guy. Malkin was the best player in one series (it did indeed happen to be the finals vs the wings), but to say he's a playoff performer, or what drove that team to win is proof to me that the writers didn't watch the games. Drives me nutz. They use different logic every year, no consistent criteria, insanely split voting... just not a valid point at all IMO. Malkin is an elite, top top top end offensive player - who is moody, lacks consistent compete level, laughable in his own zone, one of the worst face-off men in the league, selfish penalties and a spezza-esq on his give-aways. If he happens to be trying 100% at the right time, sure can be a nice teammates though.
I wish I was on my laptop instead of my office computer Shiv, would quote the chat history...
Yeah well I watched the Stanley Cup Finals and he was the best player on the ice. He was the best player in the playoffs. He deserved it.facey wroteCOLONShep wroteCOLON and has a Conn Smythe.
Seriously, referencing the awards chosen by the hockey writers is one of the weakest arguments IMO, on over half the awards every year they seem to pick the wrong guy. Malkin was the best player in one series (it did indeed happen to be the finals vs the wings), but to say he's a playoff performer, or what drove that team to win is evidence to me that the writers didn't watch the games. Drives me nutz. They use different logic every year, no consistent criteria, insanely split voting... just not a valid point at all IMO. Malkin is an elite, top top top end offensive player - who is moody, lacks consistent compete level, laughable in his own zone, one of the worst face-off men in the league, selfish penalties and a spezza-esq on his give-aways. If he happens to be trying 100% at the right time, sure can be a nice teammate though. I 100% agree he sucks to play against, because he can beat you so badly. However he seems to beat himself a similar amount.
Just to be clear. I said I'd pick Malkin. However I do believe there are teams that would benefit more for Koivu then they would Malkin.
I wish I was on my laptop instead of my office computer Shiv, would quote the chat history...
many Crosby's fanboys are with Nick on that one, no doubtsMSP4LYFE wroteCOLONDoes anyone other than Nick believe Malkin didn't deserve the Conn Smythe that year? I've had this conversation with him several times, and failed to reach a consensus, so I would like to hear everyone else's opinion.facey wroteCOLONShep wroteCOLON and has a Conn Smythe.
Seriously, referencing the awards chosen by the hockey writers is one of the weakest arguments IMO, on over half the awards every year they seem to pick the wrong guy. Malkin was the best player in one series (it did indeed happen to be the finals vs the wings), but to say he's a playoff performer, or what drove that team to win is proof to me that the writers didn't watch the games. Drives me nutz. They use different logic every year, no consistent criteria, insanely split voting... just not a valid point at all IMO. Malkin is an elite, top top top end offensive player - who is moody, lacks consistent compete level, laughable in his own zone, one of the worst face-off men in the league, selfish penalties and a spezza-esq on his give-aways. If he happens to be trying 100% at the right time, sure can be a nice teammates though.
I wish I was on my laptop instead of my office computer Shiv, would quote the chat history...
Holy shit... is it the MVP of the series award? My mistake.Shep wroteCOLONYeah but I watched the series. There was nobody even close to deserving it over Malkin.
You thinking otherwise is what's laughable.
No, but you argued that (in your opinion) Mikko Koivu could take a team farther in the playoffs, despite the fact that Malkin has a Conn Smythe trophy to his name, and well over a ppg in his playoff career, compared to Mikko who has been absolutely brutal in his post season career (albeit a short sample size).facey wroteCOLONHoly shit... is it the MVP of the series award? My mistake.Shep wroteCOLONYeah but I watched the series. There was nobody even close to deserving it over Malkin.
You thinking otherwise is what's laughable.
And note, I have not said that i'm against the Malkin vote, he owned 2/4 series. But that doesn't change how I view referencing the award.
MSP4LYFE wroteCOLONLOL, we've completely derailed this thread.
Fine. I don't care how you view the award. If i didn't feel Malkin deserved the award anyways, I wouldn't have used reference to it.facey wroteCOLONHoly shit... is it the MVP of the series award? My mistake.Shep wroteCOLONYeah but I watched the series. There was nobody even close to deserving it over Malkin.
You thinking otherwise is what's laughable.
And note, I have not said that i'm against the Malkin vote, he owned 2/4 series. I myself would have given it to Sidney most likely, great in round 1, straight up brilliant in 2 & 3, solid but injured for the finals. But that doesn't change how I view referencing the award, " The opinion of the hockey writers is X"... and we all read their stuff, so consistently full of shit, yet you remove their names from it and suddenly it's somehow more credible.
MSP4LYFE wroteCOLON No, but you argued that (in your opinion) Mikko Koivu could take a team farther in the playoffs, despite the fact that Malkin has a Conn Smythe trophy to his name, and well over a ppg in his playoff career, compared to Mikko who has been absolutely brutal in his post season career (albeit a short sample size).
Check out the other series totals...Still, you make a valid point, he has at least been decent, and perhaps more than decent on the whole. Nowhere near what Malkin has accomplished though.facey wroteCOLONMSP4LYFE wroteCOLON No, but you argued that (in your opinion) Mikko Koivu could take a team farther in the playoffs, despite the fact that Malkin has a Conn Smythe trophy to his name, and well over a ppg in his playoff career, compared to Mikko who has been absolutely brutal in his post season career (albeit a short sample size).
Some teams, not any or every team.
Mikko was fantastic in his most recent playoff experience IIRC, (loading stats page now) yep.. 4goals 5pts in a 6 game losing cause to the eventual stanley cup winning ducks (IIRC). Who shut down every top line they faced.