NHL Playoff Morning Papers (Tuesday Edition): Blackhawks need Kane and Toews to step up, Fleury outduels Ward and the Coyotes situation reaches decision day

Posted by Richard Pollock in Anaheim Ducks,Atlantic Division,Boston Bruins,Carolina Hurricanes,Central Division,Chicago Blackhawks,Colorado Avalanche,Detroit Red Wings,Eastern Conference,Minnesota Wild,NHL Morning Papers,Northwest Division,Pacific Division,Philadelphia Flyers,Phoenix Coyotes,Pittsburgh Penguins,San Jose Sharks,Southeast Division,Teams,Western Conference on May 19, 2009 — 9 Comments

3rd Round Playoff Matchups

Eastern Conference

Pittsburgh Penguins (4) versus Carolina Hurricanes (6)

Western Conference

Detroit Red Wings (2) versus Chicago Blackhawks (4)

Teams that are not in the playoffs:

The Coyotes situation:

AHL Playoffs:

  • Danielle James

    Richard I’d be interested to know how you arrive at your pronouncement that Matt Cooke is a dirty hockey player and has been for some time now. How do you define your terms? Could you give examples of other dirty hockey players and how they qualify in your view? I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with you, but I note that neither referee called a penalty on the play to which you are pointing. Presumably they saw no reason to call an infraction, dirty or otherwise.

    I’d like to see comment bars after each section of long posts like the Morning Papers on your excellent site.

  • http://www.illegalcurve.com Richard

    For years in Vancouver and recently in Washington and Pittsburgh, Cooke has been dirty. I can’t recall on the spot a specific play, but I’d bet that if you ask a handful of NHLers they’d echo the same sentiments. Other examples of dirty players would be Avery, J. Ruutu, Pronger, etc.

  • Danielle James

    The Hockey News is reporting that despite reports that Gretzky supports the Reinsdorf bid, they have not met to discuss the future of the franchise; and also that the Toronto Sun is reporting that Reinsdorf’s offer contains a condition that Gretzky must leave the team. Curiouser and curiouser.

  • Danielle James

    Thanks for the brief reply on Matt Cooke there, Richard. Perhaps you’d consider expanding upon it in an editorial? It’s an interesting topic, and I’d like to hear which NHLers voiced opinions to you about it. I don’t get many opportunities to do that kind of thing.

  • http://www.illegalcurve.com Drew

    Perhaps this topic is worthy of a phone call into the Illegal Curve Radio Show tonight, Danielle?

  • Danielle James

    I’d have phoned in and suggested the topic Big D, but that Richard guy might be there and I don’t think my ego can take being dismissed again. I heard a rumour that guy’s an accountant which would explain a lot. Or did I start that rumour?Actually, I couldn’t have listened to it live anyway.

  • http://www.illegalcurve.com david

    Danielle,

    You should never feel like a suggestion will be turned down out of turn. We are still working dilligently to implement your previous suggestions.

    And no Richard isn’t an accountant although he is rather risk averse.

  • Danielle James

    Oh no. He’s a lawyer, isn’t he? I bet I can tell you something else about him, too.

  • http://www.illegalcurve.com david

    And that would be…..