Stanley Cup Final: Tampa Bay Lightning vs. Chicago Blackhawks

[Manson]

Corey Crawford is not a good goalie.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Hedman is pretty good.  What a game for him.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Tampa Bay 3  Chicago 2  Tampa Bay leads series 2 games to 1.

When Lightning netminder Ben Bishop vacated his position to backup Andrei Vasilevskiy during the third period in Game 2, many hockey pundits (and Tampa fans alike) began wondering it there was indeed anything wrong with Bishop.

Alas, they got their answer here in Game 3, as Bishop stopped 39 shots and many Blackhawk scoring chances, in leading his team in their victory.
Bear in mind that, from the second period on, Chicago dominated the game, at one point having a 25-2  and 19-7 shots advantage.
That made Bishop's stellar perfoimance all the more vital.

With Chicago ahead 2-1 in the third on Brandon Saad's one-timer,  several seconds afterwards, the Lightning scored thanks to the work of the "Triplets" line (Palat-Johnson-Kutcherov) when Ondraj Palat shot the puck past Chicago's Corey Crawford during a scramble in front of the net.

Then, with three or so minutes left in the third period, the Lightning struck again, this time on Cedric Paquette's shot from the slot on a perfect pass from defenceman Victor Hedman.  Chicago tried furiously coming back, even with an extra attacker (empty net) but couldn't get anything past Bishop nor Tampa Bay's staunch defence.

A big confidence-building win for the Lightning proving to themselves they could compete at the Madhouse.  For Chicago, a letdown but there's no doubt the 'Hawks will want to improve for Game 4.

More here:
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/lightning-take-series-lead-with-game-3-win/

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I was just reminded that both Hedman and Stralman were left off Sweden's 2014 Olympic team. Hedman especially was considered a massive snub even at the time. Henrik freakin' Tallinder was picked over them.

And look at them now. Might be the most dominant defensive pair in the entire league.

 

[Omallley]

Have to give kudos to the Lightning for finding ways to win without Stamkos really contributing outside of a 5 game stretch against the Rangers.

 

[Bonsixx]

I made a late-season trade in my keeper league pool to get Nikita Kucherov in exchange for Patrick Sharp. His playoff production is exciting me and I'm cheering for Tampa as a result. (I also have Palat...)

I find it funny though that it seems like in most Conn Smythe discussions Kucherov is not even mentioned. He's 21 years old and one point behind the playoff lead in scoring. Kinda makes me think if he was a Canadian kid, you'd never hear the end of the hype.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Woah, no Ben Bishop for Tampa tonight. Not even dressed as back-up.

 

[Kin]

More than ever, that has me convinced that Tampa will walk away with this.

 

[L K]

Woah, no Ben Bishop for Tampa tonight. Not even dressed as back-up.

I think Kypreos and Healy should talk about how dramatic and exaggerated his injury is some more.  Canada deserves better hockey analysts.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I think Kypreos and Healy should talk about how dramatic and exaggerated his injury is some more.  Canada deserves better hockey analysts.

I've been choosing Mike Milbury and Keith Jones over them almost all playoffs. That really says something.

 

[ZBBM]

You seem to have fallen prey to the widespread and unquestioned assumption that, unless whatever you're engaged in is growing, it must be failing.  Cancer wards around the world are filled with people who will tell you it ain't necessarily so.

Well, the "Worst Analogy of the Year" award is still months away but already we have some strong early contenders.

The league is in good financial shape right now and there's no inherent reason to think it can't be viable at that level indefinitely, as a regional sport.

That "Good financial shape" is in large part due to a TV rights bubble that's already showing signs of popping. Sportsnet is killing themselves trying to increase ratings right now and regional rights are more or less tapped out. Showing hockey on TV can't be a loss leader for the networks, it doesn't attract that many eyeballs. It acually has to be profitable programming for rights fees to stay where they are, let alone grow.

As for your second point, perhaps you failed to notice that "L.A. v. New York" was cited as an example of a successful matchup in the same paragraph.

Nope. I noticed. The whole premise of the article is that, as with this year, even having one team in a large market with good penetration and good regional following can drive ratings into "good" territory. Rangers/Kings has that. Kings/Devils doesn't.

The Rangers not being "like the Yankees" is specifically a reference to their status among neutral NHL fans, not in NYC in particular. The Rangers are a huge draw among the Rangers fans, of which there are many.

Seriously, are you suggesting that the Devils in the SCF is a huge draw among Rangers fans?

  Same TV market as L.A. v. N.J.

Actually, traditionally Newark isn't considered part of the NYC TV market.

And your comment that there isn't an issue with the length of the season misses the obvious possibility that the ratings just might be higher across the board if the final were played during a time of the year when people in the US have at least a recollection of winter, icy surfaces, etc.

That's a lovely supposition but it's part of a different conversation.

Hey Nik!  I forgot we were having this lovely exchange until I came back to this thread just now.

1.  The cancer analogy goes back 50+ years and has been used in all kinds of contexts.  Politicians and Chicago-school economists hate it ... which shows its effectiveness.

2.  Newark is most def part of NYC market:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=JUzIAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA610&lpg=PA610&dq=is+newark+part+of+NYC+TV+market&source=bl&ots=jp7oXiHAzw&sig=dUteJuCVUdOFp2xAiuoh8kVBfpk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBmoVChMIzN_Vw66GxgIVMxiMCh2l0QBY#v=onepage&q=is%20newark%20part%20of%20NYC%20TV%20market&f=false

3.  Rangers fans hate the Devs and yes, by golly, some will watch just as we watch the Habs hoping for a loss.

4.  Bubble?  Would need something more than your assertion.

5.  Rangers/Kings v. Devs/Kings: you are essentially agreeing with me as to what the article is about.

6.  My lovely supposition makes perfect sense.  Your declaration that finishing in June doesn't, prima facie.  But by all means, let's do the experiment.

 

[Kin]

1.  The cancer analogy goes back 50+ years and has been used in all kinds of contexts.  Politicians and Chicago-school economists hate it ... which shows its effectiveness.

Except it doesn't make any sense. In the analogy, the business is the cancer, not a cancer patient. I'd guess that if cancer patients are themselves shrinking that's probably pretty bad for them. It's mildly witty at its surface but ultimately devoid of substance and...oh I see why you like it.

3.  Rangers fans hate the Devs and yes, by golly, some will watch just as we watch the Habs hoping for a loss.

Except we have demonstrative proof that they didn't based on the TV numbers within their respective markets for the two series.

4.  Bubble?  Would need something more than your assertion.

TV Sports a spectacular Bubble: Forbes

Building a Bigger Bubble:Salon

When the Bubble Bursts:Sports On Earth

New Challenges Chip Away at Cable Profit: NY Times

Happy reading.

5.  Rangers/Kings v. Devs/Kings: you are essentially agreeing with me as to what the article is about.

No, because you're saying that the Devils/Kings ratings is a refutation of what I just said despite the fact that neither team qualifies.

6.  My lovely supposition makes perfect sense.  Your declaration that finishing in June doesn't, prima facie.  But by all means, let's do the experiment.

I said it's a different conversation. Ratings would also be higher if the league didn't sell the rights and let any network who wanted them to broadcast them for free. That too is a different conversation. A "What would it be like if the NHL didn't really care about making money" conversation might be neat, sure, but it's beside the point of "why are the ratings so wildly variable from year to year".

Also, clean up your link if you can.

 

[L K]

Overall I liked how the refs have called this series.....and then they call 5 penalties in the 1st.  Let them play.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Oh for gawd's sake, knock it off, eh,  Mr. NBC...

http://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/u-s-tv-exec-wants-nhlers-to-shave-playoff-beards-1.2415820

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Thought Tampa was the better team last night. It's crazy how close they could have been to a 4-game sweep. Instead it's 2-2.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Chicago 2  Tampa Bay 1  Chicago leads series 3 games to 2.

As this series wears on, the Chicago Blackhawks seem to be getting smarter and a little more savvy.  Not only did Chicago win Game 4 at home by an identical score, and that the Lightning appear to have been the better team throughout this very close Stanley Cup Final, but the 'Hawks' patience and experience here and there can't quite be beat.
None of this was more evident than in Game 5.  The game started off on the wrong foot, so to speak, for Tampa Bay as goaltender Ben Bishop collided with his defenseman Victor Hedman (in what seemed like a miscommunication) which allowed the 'Hawks Patrick Sharp to easily skate around alone and dump the puck in for the opening goal.

Perhaps that mishap by Bishop and Hedman shouldn't be seen as anything predictive of the game, for Tampa Bay tied it all up soon after.  No problem.  Okay, but leave it to Chicago, more specifically Antoine Vermette who shot in a rebound during a confusion in front of the Tampa net.  No (Lightning) saw or covered Vermette coming in.  Chicago up 2-1 early in the third and the score stayed that way until the final buzzer sounded.

Certainly this wasn't one of the Lightning's better games.  Tampa Bay's luck didn't fare in the injury department, as Nikita Kutcherov hit the side post of the Chicago net and skated off in pain.  Add to that other minor injuries to players such as Tyler Johnson and Brian Boyle as well as Bishop himself who is still not completely recovered, and one can see why the Lightning were weakened somewhat.  It's still a testimonial to the Lightning in spite of the above that Chicago could only muster a one goal win.  Goes to show once again just what a close series this has been.

The 'Hawks have the opportunity to win the Stanley Cup on home ice Monday night, a feat not accomplished since Chicago last win it in 1938 (over the Maple Leafs).
Tampa Bay can regroup and stay focused and do what they have done throughout these playoffs, which is, never say die.

More:
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/vermette-leads-blackhawks-to-3-2-series-lead/

 

[L K]

Sustr and Garrison have had some pretty bone-headed goals scored against them in this series.  How you let Duncan Keith get a big shot and then let him come in and get a wide open shot again off the rebound  is nuts.  Garrison is just floating in no-mans land.

1-0 Blackhawks late in the 2nd period.  Tampa looks like they can't keep up with Chicago anymore.

 

[Kin]

I'm sure this is unfair to one extent or another but despite the numbers I'm really not coming away from this thinking "Boy, Bishop is a really good goaltender" but rather "Boy, Bishop is really big".

 

[ZBBM]

If Tampa doesn't get this thing tied up in the next 10 minutes, and then push it to a 7th, Stamkos has got to walk away from the playoffs feeling about as low as you can get.  He really hasn't gotten it done.

 

[bustaheims]

Unbelievably, that's the first 2 goal lead in the series. Crazy.