2009-10 NHL Season Preview: My Predictions

Nice predictions, I appreciate the not simply modifying last year’s standings. The Bruins took a big fall and the Canadiens a huge leap forward, any reason for that? Is it often that very restructured teams take a huge leap in one season (Canadiens) like that? I’d love to see a +1, +2 or whatever your predicted change is from last season’s standings along with a short description why you predict they finish there, but its your blog.

by ThrashersRecaps on Sep 30, 2009 9:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Dart throw pick!

Anyone who REALLY thinks they know how the Habs will be this year are fooling themselves. With such a huge roster turn over its feasible to predict them anywhere from 3rd to 12th!

I find sometimes it's easy to be myself
sometimes I find it's better to be somebody else

by Fauxrumors on Sep 30, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

well

I’m having a hard time with 3rd, ‘cause I can’t see how anyone other than boston can win the Northeast.

"Life is just a place where we spend time between games. Hockey is where we live, where we can best meet and overcome pain and wrong and death." - Fred Shero

by Karina on Sep 30, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, I normally offer much more detailed predictions, but was out of town this year when this was posted.

Basically, I think the Bruins could be in for a big fall and someone will benefit from that. I don’t think either Montreal or Boston will be particularly strong this season, at least compared to some of the East’s other top teams, and that the Northeast may even be hockey’s weakest division this season.

That’s my thinking.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Oct 7, 2009 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I will not throw a hand grenade your way (you’ll get enough of those). The Boston, Montreal, St. Louis and Anaheim predictions are interesting.

by skatehack on Sep 30, 2009 9:50 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Thoughts on predictions -- Habs, Bruins, Sabres, Flames, etc...

Nice, interesting predictions. They seem very rational, a few thoughts:

The biggie first: I do think the Habs’ ceiling is very high, and I think the Bruins will take a significant step back while still remaining strong (just Tim Thomas reverting to excellent rather than unearthly would set them back a fair bit), so I do think it’s quite possible they will beat the Bruins… but the Habs do have a fair number of questions going for them so for them to beat the Bruins remains a bold prediction, and I’m surprised to see it. Things have to go right in Montreal for that to happen, despite existing contingencies (ie. Halak if Price falters). So, bold call there, not impossible, but not what I’d expect from on-paper prediction. That’s one you’ll probably be asked to explain — I certainly would love to see your reasoning!

Buffalo is a trendy pick to do better than last season, and with good reason — missing the playoffs despite a positive goal-differential. But their #1 D left in the off-season and that can’t help them. Health is an issue for them. But they’ve been considerably better than their standings position for a couple years now, so I agree with your ranking of them.

I think picking the Rangers for a dip is a good bet. Like you I think Carolina is more of a bubble team, but the ‘Canes are weird — they’ll be weak a few years years, have one crazy run (up to and including a Cup), then go back to being weak a few years. Not sold on Toronto, but none of the teams behind them seem stronger than the Leafs (well, Ottawa does, despite their blueline issues).

I think Vancouver outdoes the Flames. I’m not sold on Kipper as an elite goalie (he’s been in decline for years), and I do think JBo will do what people thought Phaneuf would do, but I don’t think the Flames have quite enough forward depth — then again, they won’t be a weak team either. Vancouver has better goaltending, a strong defense, and a very good group of forwards despite the like of an Iginla-like headliner. The Stars need to fix their goaltending, I’m not sure they make the playoffs with Turco who’s been oscillating between mediocre and bad over the last few years. I see the Ducks making it in ahead of them.

by MathMan on Sep 30, 2009 9:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

The Canucks and Flames will likely battle all year for top spot, with the other three teams acting as fodder for both. Kipper is the X factor though. I think Calgary has a better defence – both offensively and defensively, though Vancouver’s is no slouch, and both have offensive units with some great players, and some holes.

If Kipper is average, I believe the Flames are the better team. If he’s good/great, then yes, #2 in the conference is no long shot. Luongo is going to be very good, at least in the regular season, so the Canucks at least have that confidence.

The Flames will probably struggle a bit out of the gate, given they are learning a new system, but I expect a pretty good dogfight to end the year.

by Resolute on Sep 30, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

On paper, both teams are close, and it’ll decided based on actual performance on ice, how well the players execute given their talents. The Flames will be better than last year, but Canucks will be better too. If the Flames have a slow start, and the Canucks don’t falter too much given the tough schedule, the Canucks take the division. On the other hand, if the Flames start strong and the Canucks struggle around the Olypmic break, the Flames win the division.

by SJKel on Sep 30, 2009 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd much rather the Sharks finish third...

As we saw how well finishing first worked last year. Hopefully that means they will be a bit more on edge heading into the postseason (a 1 or 2 seed was guaranteed at about 3/4 through last year).

Fear the Fin: Where... IMA TAKING UR BLOGZ FRUM U!!

by That'll Cheech You on Sep 30, 2009 10:02 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

And a question...

Why does it seem like people usually use the old logo?

Fear the Fin: Where... IMA TAKING UR BLOGZ FRUM U!!

by That'll Cheech You on Sep 30, 2009 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It’s better.

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Sep 30, 2009 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Then again, that doesn’t explain the use of the Buffaslug or the Senator that’s looking at you.

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Sep 30, 2009 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed...

Orange is not a Sharks color, at least in my world.

by bison on Sep 30, 2009 5:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’d point out that correlation doesn’t imply causation, except that one data point isn’t even a correlation…

by RyanV on Sep 30, 2009 10:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Kings

Will get into the playoffs this year. They have a lot of young talent, and the Scuderi / Smyth acquisitions should put them in. This team just sucked at goaltending / defense last year. They also had ZERO leadership. Now they do. Kings will be the surprise team

Windy City Hockey

by The Admiral on Sep 30, 2009 10:14 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

The Kings were a very good defensive team for most of last year. It didn’t hold up over the full season, but they weren’t a bad defensive team overall.

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Sep 30, 2009 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

L.A.’s problem last year, believe it or not, was scoring. They were last in the league at even strength goals for.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Oct 7, 2009 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, no major beef here, but because I feel like nitpicking…

- As I’ve stated many times before, I wouldn’t put Washington at 1, but don’t have an issue with it.
- Montreal is too much of a wild card right now. It wouldn’t surprise me if they finished as high as 5th (loser of Pitt/Philly being 4th), but I still don’t think they’re better than Boston.
- 6 through 12 in the East is really a crapshoot. The three bottom teams should be Ottawa, TB, and NYI in some order though.
- Blues 12th in the West? That’s probably my biggest disagreement here. With all they fought through last year, they were still able to finish 8th. I find it hard to agree they will regress that much this year. I would probably swap them and Columbus.
- Minnesota is another huge x-factor as well. I’m just not seeing it as this is a team in transition. Sure, they can sneak in, but I think 6th is a little too high.

Overall, good job. Of course, these will all be blown to bits by December like always.
-

by Afino on Sep 30, 2009 10:30 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

- 6 through 12 in the East is really a crapshoot.

Yeah, that whole cluster there. Last year, wasn’t it 4th through 9th were separated by six points? And Buffalo right behind that? Makes predictions a maddening exercise. Everyone could boil down to: “I see a few elite teams, a few awful teams, and a big fat cloud of uncertainty.”

Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.

by Dominik on Sep 30, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

8th and 9th in the East last year had the exact same record. Montreal got in on the second tiebreaker.

That’s what can seperate teams after 82 games.

To be honest, it’s not like the teams at 1-5 as people see them will be safely in the postseason, either. While I agree those consensus picks are likely to make the playoffs, a couple of them could be in the #6-8 seeds easily. And one of them could definitely miss and fire their coach as a result.

When you consider how the Cup Champions nearly missed the playoffs before they switched coaches, the old standby “anything can happen” rings true.

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Sep 30, 2009 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Parity, baby! Pittsburgh’s turnaround was pretty remarkable. I’m surprised more people aren’t running with some sort of “two Cup finals hangover” theory to knock them down; but I bet Bylsma keeps them focused and rolling.

I don’t mind parity a bit — though I’d prefer the Islanders grab a seat at the table, and I’d prefer if it weren’t blurred by the 2=3 loser point system. (But that’s a whole different tangent.)

Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.

by Dominik on Sep 30, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

James picking the Habs to finish 3rd seems like the kiss of death. When he picked them to finish 13th, they finished 1st, and I bugged him all year about it. I think he had them at a more modest spot last year than most prognostications did, so he wasn’t to blame for last year’s collapse. Maybe I’m reading too much into this. lol

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Sep 30, 2009 10:40 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Ouch. NYR below the Panthers? Good times to be a NYR fan.

Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.

http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo

by poploser on Sep 30, 2009 10:50 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I can live with the notion with Washington finishing 1st, but I think it was more to do with the fact that they have more opportunity to feast on the two Florida Teams and Atlanta for points.

by NHL Observer on Sep 30, 2009 10:54 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Last year they were relatively speaking atrocious against the SE. At one point it was along the lines of 12-1-2 vs NE, 10-6 vs SE, 10-3-1 vs ATL. The only way they’ll improve is by playing the SE tougher and playing better against the West.

by red army line on Sep 30, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

overall, good picks

My only disagreements would be:

1) Picking Montreal so high. I’m not sure all the discarded parts making up that Frankenstein monster will fit together well. I don’t see the Bruins being as strong as last year, but I still think they’re the best team in that division.

2) I think the Rangers will finish ahead of the Devils. I think this is the year that New Jersey’s famed depth finally fails.

3) Vancouver, Anaheim, and Detroit (in that order) look like the 3 best teams in the West to me.

4) LA and St. Louis have better chances of making the playoffs than Columbus and Minnesota.

5) I think Calgary will be this season’s stunning disappointment. Probably due to an injury to one of their core players.

P is for Latrobe.

by holiday park on Sep 30, 2009 11:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

My bold predictions are more at the bottom of each conference (Tampa, LA, etc) instead of at the top.

by red army line on Sep 30, 2009 11:11 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I can’t agree with the Western Conference… I can’t see Minnesota, Columbus and Dallas making the playoffs. I’d look for Edmonton, St. Louis and LA to push for spots.

by wlittle on Sep 30, 2009 11:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

And because I love hate mail...Let's Go!

Prognostications a plenty… So since this is a post about who can play Nostradamus to their greatest ability I figured why not try my hand at it, so here are my predictions:

Western Conference:
1) Chicago- solid defence to go along with a viper strike offence. Huet?
2) Anaheim- great goaltending and are led offensively by the Getzlaf-Perry-Ryan line.
3) Minnesota- Havlat and Sykora will bolster the offence which will help Backstrom.
4) Detroit- still the model franchise but key losses in the off-season will hurt.
5) St. Louis- look for the Blues to take a big step with very impressive young team.
6) Dallas- the returns of Richards and Morrow should get the Stars back to 2008 form.
7) San Jose- Great 1st line, but after that? Greiss? Leadership by commitee?
8) Vancouver- Great start will help, but can we trust Luongo to stay healthy? Raycroft?

Missing out:
9) LA- much like the Hawks of 2008, the young studs in LA will barely miss.
10) Calgary- Who’s going to score? Too much D, not enough O. Very 2009 Wild like.
11) Pheonix- Tippett will help the Yotes get back to the form of the 1st half of 2008-09.
12) Columbus- Even Roy and Belfour suffered bad 2nd years, so will Mason.
13) Edmonton- Khabby will get hurt, and with that D their back-ups will get exposed.
14) Nashville- One of these years Trotz will run out of magic, this is the year.
15) Colorado- If Statsny and Wolski can stay healthy this team may suprise.

And why not? let’s try my hand at the other conference
Eastern Conference
1) Washington- Ovechkin and co. should keep this team a the top, but Theodore?
2) Pittsburgh- the Champs are here, but slow start could keep them out of the top spot.
3) Boston- Look for Lucic to have a career year with Savard, and Chara will be Chara.
4) Philadelphia- Offensively gifted with a tremendous D. Emery is questionable.
5) Carolina- look for $6.3 mil. dollar man Ward to backstop this team to 39+ wins again
6) NJ- Broduer and Parise will guide this team, but Lemaire and the trap?
7) Ottawa- Look for the Sens to bouce back after 2 lackluster seasons. LeClaire helps.
8) Buffalo- Miller will benefit from the Olympic break making the Sabres a contender.

Missing out:
9) Florida- just missing out on the party, still good team with Horton, Weiss, and Booth.
10) NYRangers- Gaborik`s injuries keep this team on the outside looking in.
11) Tampa Bay- Additions will help but how much? Goaltending still a problem.
12) Montreal- The Price is still wrong and the makeover won’t work. Bon Soir Gainey?
13) Atlanta- Kovalchuk departure at dealine, sends Thrash into tailpsin. Lehtonen?
14) Toronto- truculence will only lead to more PP against and with Toskala in goal…?
15) NYIslanders- after Tavares and Streit what else? Biron and Roloson gone by March?

So there you have it and I’m sure there will be a bit of discussion of who I’ve picked where and how, but who really knows what’s going to happen? But there are some teams getting too much Stanley Cup contender talk that most likely won’t make the playoffs.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 11:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

The only way Miller benefits from the Olympics is if he doesn’t play…..that’s no guarantee.

by Afino on Sep 30, 2009 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The best thing for Miller is...

…if he has any lingering injury he can pull himself from the Olympics and rest himself for the stretch run for the Sabres as they make a push towards a playoff spot. Don’t be suprised if Miller doesn’t become the only one on a bubble team that decides to take the 2 weeks or more off to concentrate on the regular season for I believe there will be many like him. There is too much money to be lost if bubble teams miss the playoffs because of an injury sustained during the Olympics, in fact many of the Cup Contenders may have some of their important players skip the Olympic festivites to concentrate solely on winning the Stanley Cup (remember Ottawa in 2006 anyone?).
This is part of the reason why I think that after Vancouver this year the NHL participating at the Olympic games is over.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Calgary- Who’s going to score? Too much D, not enough O. Very 2009 Wild like.

You mean aside from Iginla, Jokinen, Langkow, Bourque, Moss, Bouwmeester and Phaneuf?

The Flames were top-ten in the league in offence last year. Losing Cammalleri will drop that down a bit, but he was hardly our entire offence.

by Resolute on Sep 30, 2009 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kipper

Unfortunately Kipper has sucked for a couple of years now. I can’t see him backstopping the Flames to glory.

by ehteam on Sep 30, 2009 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Having a head coach not named Keenan...

… should do wonders for Kipper’s mental health. Whether his body can bounce back to pre-Keenan levels remains to be seen.

by BleedBlue42 on Sep 30, 2009 8:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Predicting some sort of step back for Boston is a very safe bet, what with their dependence on Hasek-level goaltending from Tim Thomas and career seasons from so many of their guys. If everyone reverts closer to career average, il will have a big impact in their standings.

From there, the question is whether Montreal can get things together enough to beat them. The talent level is such that the ceiling is very high for that team, but there are a lot of questions.

It’s hardly impossible, but it doesn’t seem very likely. Boston winning a close race would be my guess, assuming there isn’t a surprise somewhere (Boston, two years ago, squeaked into the playoffs with a negative goal-differential and a very similar roster, after all).

by MathMan on Oct 1, 2009 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Losing Camalleri and Betuzzi will hurt.

Look at the 8 teams I have made making the playoffs and with the exception of Detroit all of them have made significant upgrades offensively, whereas the Flames have not. Boumeester is a very talented defencemen but counting on him to pick up some of the slack that Bertuzzi and Cammalleri left behind is asking too much, combined with the fact that I don’t think Boumeester will make a tremendous difference defensively for the Flames. Phaneuf is the X-Factor for the Flames and needs to start progressing as an all-around defenceman for if he struggles again so will his defence partner-Boumeester. Having basically no back-up for Kiprussoff is major cause for concern as well.
Not to mention, many Flames fans have Bourque and Moss hitting the 25+ goal plateau which is ridiculous. Don’t be suprised if these two find themselves within the 15-20 goal range which is respectable and realistic. Langkow could find himself in a down year with no real sniper to play with. All in all, the Flames won’t be a top 10 offensive teams this year, in fact they may become one of the worst, especially if Iginla were to go down.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Losing Bertuzzi will hurt

I guess I’m not surprised that somebody believes this, but you may be very lonely… I think the Flames likely believe his -13 against cushy opposition is a contribution they’d like to not replace.

I've been looking at the sky

by Back In Black on Sep 30, 2009 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Love the Flames fans responses

Bertuzzi won’t hurt, really? Obviously the most successful franchise in hockey in the last 15 years thinks he’s pretty good or they wouldn’t have signed him. Babcock likes two-way players so Holland wouldn’t have signed Bertuzzi if he wasn’t, his -13 probably had something to do with the fact Keenan had him with Cammalleri and Langkow, both not noted as being the greatest defensively which seen them see their fair share of teams top lines when the Flames were on the road. Will Bertuzzi’s offence will be missed? Time will tell, but I think it will.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not a Flames fan, I'm a Bertuzzi hater

Sheesh. And when I see a one-dimensional offensive player with nine even strength goals and ~~13, I’m thinking that guy was not very successful. Blaming it on Langkow (+1) and Cammalleri (-2) doesn’t excuse anything. More advanced stats than +/~~ will show that Bertuzzi was sheltered from quality opposition and still failed, and that all of his linemates put up better numbers when he wasn’t on the ice.

I don’t know why Detroit picked him up, but that doesn’t retroactively change his performance for the Flames.

I've been looking at the sky

by Back In Black on Sep 30, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yuck

SBN should really leave the strikeouts to html tags. It’s not like it’s a feature that needs to be used often.

I've been looking at the sky

by Back In Black on Sep 30, 2009 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’ll try and get that fixed.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Oct 7, 2009 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought I went over this at some point

Bertuzzi was “Only watch for train wreck effect”awful for the Flames last season. He was, at best, average on offense, but a complete and total liability on defense.

Losing Bertuzzi from last year and plugging in an average NHL player who can play defense will help that team. I don’t think they’re going to win the NW, but losing Bertuzzi makes them better.

The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time

by Jibblescribbits on Sep 30, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Beyond that, virtually every player on the team averaged fewer points per 60 minutes played and gave up more per 60 minutes played with Bertuzzi than away from him. Todd Bertuzzi was a clear liability, and made this team worse.

As to the Cammalleri angle, people fool themselves if they thnk we haven’t got a replacement for him. The Replacement is Jokinen. He likely won’t score 39, but he will come close. What we need to replace are the 17 goals Lombardi/Jokinen gave us last year. And given Bourque and Moss were the only two players still with the team that had a peak year last year, one can’t really argue our top ten in scoring was the result of a lot of career years.

by Resolute on Sep 30, 2009 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the fact that you question Langkow’s defensive ability really seals the question of whether you have any clue what you are talking about when it comes to the Flames…

Incidentally, if the Red Wings are so brilliant to sign Bertuzzi, why are you picking Chicago to finish ahead of them? Pretty obvious your personal bias has overruled logic.

by Resolute on Sep 30, 2009 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Resolute take it easy...

…I understand that you’re upset about my opinion of the Flames, but it’s just an opinion…That’s all, and I do know what I’m talking about when it comes to Calgary for I did see a lot of them last year (10 games in fact with Chicago winning 8 of them).

I think the fact that you question Langkow’s defensive ability really seals the question of whether you have any clue what you are talking about when it comes to the Flames…

When it comes to Langkow he is a very good PK and face-off guy but often loses his assignments defensively, especially in the Chicago series for I found the Hawks were far too often open in the slot area which in most defensive systems is the centreman’s responsibility.

Incidentally, if the Red Wings are so brilliant to sign Bertuzzi, why are you picking Chicago to finish ahead of them? Pretty obvious your personal bias has overruled logic.

Never said it was brilliant, just said that the Wings don’t necessarily agree with your asessment that Bertuzzi is defensively unreliable, for if they did they wouldn’t have signed him for Babcock wants 2-way players.
Also I don’t think I’m the only person in the hockey universe picking Chicago to win the Central Division, for after reaching the Finals in consecutive years and years of success the Red Wings have not only lost key individuals in the off-season but might suffer a lag in their play due to the physical toll the Wings have suffered the past 3 seasons. With the additions of Hossa, Kopecky, and Madden to go along with last seasons playoff experience the Hawks look poised to supercede the Wings for Central Division supremacy.
It’s not biased, in fact many publications like McKleen’s and ESPN have the Hawks finishing atop the Western Conference.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 9:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If you had watched Bertuzzie play at all last year you would feel entirely foolish posting that he’s a two way player.

I learned last year it’s not necessary to hate Bertuzzi for what he did to Steve Moore (nor do I), just having him on your team is enough motivation to do that. He made the Flames worse last year, and if he gets any significant amount of ice time, he’ll make the Red Wings worse this year.

You can predict what you want for the standings, but making assessments of a player based on “what Mike Babcock wants”, as if you somehow have a pipeline to his exact thoughts on everything is just ridiculous.

by Subversive on Sep 30, 2009 10:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

and if he’d watched Kopecky play at all last year he’d know that he’s useless. Anyway, I’m not going to spend too much energy debating this now. Why can’t this season start already

by detroitnick on Sep 30, 2009 11:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

On Kopecky

I know what you mean. I think the Hawks signed Kopecky to lure Hossa to Chicago for I really can’t think of another reason why they would sign him, especially if they had Madden already commited to sign.
And of course I did watch him in Detroit and I do hope he gets more than 9 goals in 79 games liek he did last season, but I’m not counting on it.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Oct 1, 2009 9:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Flames were top-ten in the league in offence last year. Losing Cammalleri will drop that down a bit, but he was hardly our entire offence.

Silly Resolute, haven’t you been reading Leafs’ predictions? It doesn’t matter if the team’s been top 10 the past four years despite drop-offs being predicted every summer because THIS YEAR IT WILL HAPPEN.

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Sep 30, 2009 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not doubt the Leafs will score....

…and probably might even crack the top 10 offensively, but it’s the GA that will kill them for I don’t believe that Toskala will rebound, and that Gustavsson is the answer. If the Leafs PK goes south then so will the team especially if they’re going to play the way Burkie wants them to, which will lead to a lot of penalities against.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yup

The GA is what’ll make or break the year for the team. I would be stunned if the PK managed to be even worse than last year or that Gustavsson will be worse than the backups last year.

The Leafs were among the least penalised teams last year and fighting majors are off-setting so I don’t see a huge increase in PIMs.

Also, Gustavsson is the answer just not sure what the question is yet.

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Sep 30, 2009 6:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the PK is the biggest concern for the Leafs...

…for I do worry a little about Burke’s style he wants to play with a much more aggressive style, it will help in some aspects but it will hurt when it comes to minor penalties. The addition of Wayne Primeau to the PK to go along with Komasarek will definitely help in winning draws and blocked shots, but the success of the PK ultimately lies uopn the shoulders of the two netminders Toskala and Gustavsson. Is Gustavsson the real deal? Well if pre-season is any indication then yes, but as we all know pre-season is much different than the regular season. Will Toskala rebound? Sometimes (during the pre-season) he gave me that indication, but other times it looks like he has taken a step backwards.
The Leafs have improved in certain areas immensely, but if their goaltending falters much like last year then it may result in the Leafs finishing in the same position as last year, maybe even worse.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 9:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Have you confused Luongo with Cloutier? What’s the evidence that he can’t stay healthy? That last season he was unable to start more than 70 games for the first time in 5 years (but still played 54 games and played well after his injury). That’s enough to case doubt, really?

by SJKel on Sep 30, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Luongo?

Any time a goaltender suffers a serious groin injury you have to be careful for they tend to repeat themselves. Not saying that it will, just saying it could and if it does the ball then goes to Raycroft, and with him in net the Canucks may find themselves in deep trouble.
That and the pressure that goes along with having unrealistic expectations put upon them by the Canadian media, which could also destroy them…case in point, Montreal last year and the Senators the year before.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It wasn’t a serious groin injury. There was no surgery. And if Luongo is injured again, the ball only goes to Raycroft if he can handle it (So far he’s played well in preseason). If not, the Canucks will find another goalie. Sanford didn’t automatically become the starter after Luongo was injured last year, after showing that he couldn’t handle the workload. Cory Schneider could still develop into a quality NHL starter after dominating the AHL last year, despite failing to make the team. You didn’t say Luongo will, but you’re predicting the team to finish 8th, which most likely doesn’t happen unless it experiences major injury problems

I guess you don’t live in Canada, so you have no idea that those teams always face the intense amount of scrutiny and high expectations all the time. It was never possible to exceed expectations because as soon as a team starts to win a few games, expectations rise immediately. That shouldn’t be a factor. And I can bet that the Wild doesn’t win the division. It’s either Calgary of Vancouver. Havlat is every bit as injury-prone as Gaborik.

by SJKel on Sep 30, 2009 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What?

I guess you don’t live in Canada, so you have no idea that those teams always face the intense amount of scrutiny and high expectations all the time.

I live in Ottawa so I’ve seen first hand what unrealistic expectations can do to a team. The fact that the Senators had to play the whole season like it was Game 7 of the finals eventually wore that team down mentally, which was the same type of pressure that eventually drowned the Canadiens. For my opinion, all Canadian teams feel too much pressure to win and that’s why most of the teams continously fail when having unrealistic expectations thrusted uopn them. One of the reasons why Ottawa suceeded in 2007 was because not a whole lot was expected from them after losing Chara and Havlat, and the same from Montreal in 2008 after missing the playoffs in 2007, not to mention the Canucks last season when at the beginning of the year it was projected be a nothing more than ‘doom and gloom’ year after losing Naslund and others.
As I said before in my post ‘who knows what’s going to happen?’ having the Wild winning the Northwest division is risky, but who knew the Capitals would win their division in 2008? same goes for Montreal in the same year? What about the Devils last year and the Canucks? Who here had the Blues and Jackets making the playoffs last year? Not I. So eventhough the Wild aren’t the trendy pick it doesn’t mean they can’t win, as history has shown us anything can happen.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So according to you, the Canadian teams only win when there is no expectation in the beginning of the season. But the media and fans pay attention and adjust their expectations mid season. They change their opinion of the teams all the time, usually based on the past 2-3 games. What people expect in the beginning of the season doesn’t matter as soon as the season has started. I believe your observations is purely coincidence. The media are expecting one of Calgary and Vancouver to win the division, so you want to bet that neither wins because of pressure?

by SJKel on Sep 30, 2009 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not even close...

…the Flames don’t win due to their lack of offence and that their defence will only improve slightly. The Nucks won’t win for some of the same reasons, but the immense pressure put upon them won’t help either.
I know in picking the Wild it’s a bit riské but with the new system in place by Todd Richards and the additions of Havlat and Sykora to an already very good defensive team may be the key ingredients to winning the Northwest Division. I could pick the same teams as everyone else, but I decided to go on a limb and pick an underdog like the Wild to win their division for it seems to happen every year. Oh and by the way, ever heard of Niklas Backstrom? He’s a pretty good goaltender in his own right and his numbers are similar to, if not better than, Kiprussoff and Luongo’s the past 2 seasons.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 10:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If the Canucks or the Flames win the Northwest division this season, what would you be wiling to lose? I propose a fanpost admitting defeat. I’m opening to other proposals too.

by SJKel on Sep 30, 2009 11:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ha

I have the Wild pegged as my reverse sleeper team, i.e. the team that falls off a cliff that no one expects.

The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time

by Jibblescribbits on Oct 1, 2009 8:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Wild?

A lot of people have the Wild pegged for 12th to 13th in the West so I don’t think you’re alone in that thinking and it could turn out to be my Keith Jones’ Hossa but I’m willing to live with it.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Oct 1, 2009 9:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Umm Mirtle

Has them 6th, and most predictions I find have them in the 6-10 range.

But everyone always went on about how great a coach Lemaire is, well they lost him, they are changing systems (from trap to “up-tempo” how’d that go for the Avs last season?) Lost 4 quality players, and only got 1 replacement (Havlat). It’s not unreasonable for Backstrom to not be Vezina caliber either.

The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time

by Jibblescribbits on Oct 1, 2009 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

True Mirtle has them 6th

but as I scroll through other publications it seems we’re the only two having the Wild going to the playoffs. We’ll see!

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Oct 1, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ball only goes to Raycroft if he can handle it (So far he’s played well in preseason).

If Raycroft ever has to play then the Canucks are well and truly stuffed.

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Sep 30, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

(So far he’s played well in preseason)

Somehow I find that even funnier than saying the Flames will miss Bertuzzi…

I've been looking at the sky

by Back In Black on Oct 1, 2009 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Sharks have only one line? Actually, when someone like Patrick Marleau is forced to play on the 2nd, you know there’s more than one good line. In fact, we’ve very quietly picked up quite a few role players to fill out those 3rd and 4th lines to go with a bunch of rookies chomping at the bit.

About Greiss: He hasn’t looked great, he knows this is his last shot. I don’t think you’ll find a fan at fearthefin.com that isn’t excited about the parade of rookie goalies in the system.

After looking at your predictions, I’d like to offer you a new phrase: “I don’t really know anything about that team except what ESPN and Eklund told me.” You could probably safely put that next to 29 of the teams you ranked, since we obviously know where your loyalty lies.

Jon Casey fan since '84

by stufflife on Sep 30, 2009 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And the hate mail continues...

For starters I don’t read ESPN ever, nor do I listen to Eklund (Mr. Always-Wrong at the deadline) so if their picks looks familiar to mine then so be it, but it would be just irony that’s all.
Marleau should be a phenominal 2nd line centre, but as history shows us in 2007-2008 that wasn’t case when Marleau was shifted back onto the 2nd line. Clowe and Pavelski should compliment his style of game but that remains to be seen.

In fact, we’ve very quietly picked up quite a few role players to fill out those 3rd and 4th lines to go with a bunch of rookies chomping at the bit.

That’s what has me worried about the Sharks for they do lack depth and counting on rookies to step-up their game may be unrealistic for the jump from the AHL to the NHL is a drastic one, although having Torrey Mitchell back in the line-up will give the Sharks 3rd line a most certain boost.

About Greiss: He hasn’t looked great, he knows this is his last shot. I don’t think you’ll find a fan at fearthefin.com that isn’t excited about the parade of rookie goalies in the system.

So if Greiss fails then just trot out another goaltender? If Greiss is struggling now then the Sharks might as well look in another direction for a back-up. If Nabokov goes down then their trouble just like about 20 other teams.
Although I do like the Sharks decision to name a captain before the season starts with Blake being the new captain-good choice. Rumours had the Sharks doing a leadership by commitee act and that just sounded ridiculous. So good move to name Blake as captain.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Sep 30, 2009 10:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

In 2007-08, Marleau was also feuding with Ron Wilson and plagued by trade rumors. That was likely the main cause for his abnormal season, as evidenced by his scoring streak after the trade deadline passed and he was no longer haunted by said rumors.

Also, the third and fourth lines are by no means filled out by rookies. The third line is centered by Manny Malhotra, with Jamie McGinn (who played 35 games last season) and regularly Torrey Mitchell on the wing. I say regularly, because Mitchell is out with another leg injury. The fourth line has Scott Nichol centering Jody Shelley and either Staubitz, Ortmeyer, or some rookie. From those six, the only names that qualify as rookies are Jamie McGinn and Brad Staubitz, who both played more than 30 games last season in San Jose.

And the lauded goalie factory that is San Jose is not to be underestimated. If Greiss falters, there’s Alex Stalock and Tyson Sexsmith down in Worcester, both of whom have dominated their respective leagues (NCAA and WHL). Futher down the line, there are Sateri, Karlsson, and even Heemskerk who was just signed to an ELC. While the latter three likely aren’t ready for a starting goaltender position in the NHL, both Stalock and Sexsmith impressed during training camp and the preseason, so it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to expect them to perform competently at the NHL level.

"I think I realized after the second or third punch, I should have taken his helmet off sooner." - Ryane Clowe
Proud member of the "Don't Trade Marleau" Club
Fools and Sages

by mymclife on Sep 30, 2009 11:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

On Marleau

When it comes to trade rumours with Marleau won’t they increase this season with him entering his final year of his deal? And hasn’t McClelland make it obvious by stripping the “C” off his chest that he is not a ‘fan’ of Marleau’s leadership qualities and could that lead to a tumultuous relationship between the two? It will be interesting how Marleau plays now that the “C” is off his chest.

Too bad about Mitchell for it’s seems he has a bright future if only he can get away from the injury bug, how long is he out for? Will be rooting for McGinn to do well for I always like to see former 67’s become successful in the NHL.

Do you think Tyson Sexsmith is already ready for NHL action? I would be hesitant to put him in that situation just yet for he still needs (in my mind) another year of AHL action under his belt for the Sharks don’t want to rush him like Montreal has done with Price.

It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!

by hawks61 on Oct 1, 2009 9:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Glad to see a positive Habs prediction for once. It’s, of course, easier to just pick them eleventh and then at the end of the year say that everyone was fooled and act all surprised by how they’re in the playoffs.

I’m not sure why there’s so much out there about how it was a poor move to change the team completely. The team last season did not deserve the playoffs and was a total cluster****. It was, also the perfect set of bizarre circumstances to mess that team up, so the only way is up in my opinion. In contrast, the year before that was the perfect set of circumstances to propel them up to first in the conference. In reality, this team is more of a fifth or sixth seed type of team.

On a different note, I think the Bruins are in a similar situation, where last season was their maximum ceiling, in terms of injuries and players having career years. They’re going to drop but where they end up depends on whether anyone else in the division can be good enough to overtake them. Who knows, they could be one of those three seeds that ends up with less points than the four seed.

by kevincrumbs on Sep 30, 2009 11:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely. I think the Northeast leader could have fewer points than the fourth and fifth seeds this year. We’ll see how well Boston plays.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Oct 7, 2009 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I see Florida making it, Boston winning the Adams… er Northeast… pushing either the Canadians or Sabres out of the mix.

The Canadians will make the playoffs if they can find enough offense and the Sabres will make it if they can stay relatively healthy.

St. Louis could sneak in again, though I think it may be good for them to take a step back this year. Anaheim’s still very good, and was a clear winner in the Pronger trade. (I may be the only one to think that, however.)

by RCheli on Sep 30, 2009 11:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Et Tu, James?

St. Louis 12th? Very interesting indeed. Chicago 5th? I dunno, especially if Detroit actually regresses for once, which they’re due for. At least you’re better than the ESPN hacks that picked the Lightning(s) 10th overall. I mean, wow.

One day, David Backes and Albert Pujols will combine forces to become the most awesome piece of violent force known to man.

by Donut King on Sep 30, 2009 2:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Not gonna say too much about this, except… Montreal 3rd in the East? Ballsy.

Being a Leaf fan here requires one to be sufficiently lubricated... and truculent!

by stucky on Sep 30, 2009 2:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Not Bad

I’d switch the Blues and Columbus. Though the Blues were streaky last year, if everyone stays healthy this year they should be a force.

by The_Fat_Guy on Sep 30, 2009 3:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I’m quite happy about this prediction. Not coming from a biased source or anything…

"My face is my mask."

by jakeshapiro on Sep 30, 2009 4:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Kinda gutsy...

I can’t see Buffalo doing well because that team has some serious issues about fading away and such. And Tim Connelly probably won’t stay healthy, as usual.

After watching the Habs in the preseason, I could see them making the playoffs, just not in third place.

Over at the West, I just can’t see the Ducks missing the playoffs. As much as I hate them, I sure hope they do miss.

As for Dallas, this is one of the only lists where I’ve seen them actually make the playoffs. I think they will, not only because B-Rad and Morrow are back, but because it’s virtually the same team that made it to the West finals in 2008. It all kind of depends on Marty Turco, though.

Follow me on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/SLStarsFan

by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Sep 30, 2009 4:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

GO SLUGS

I am so clever that sometimes I don’t understand a single word of what I am saying
Trent Edwards - Backup QB until furthur notice. Care to prove me wrong Trent?

by J2 on Oct 2, 2009 2:31 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs